JoNova

A science presenter, writer, speaker & former TV host; author of The Skeptic's Handbook (over 200,000 copies distributed & available in 15 languages).


Handbooks

The Skeptics Handbook

Think it has been debunked? See here.

The Skeptics Handbook II

Climate Money Paper


Advertising

micropace


GoldNerds

The nerds have the numbers on precious metals investments on the ASX



Archives

Maurice Newman, you are not allowed to say words like “order” “world” and “new”

Never talk about a new world order.

We’re on flak-watch tonight, and pop-guns are going off at the ABC. Jeff Sparrow is firing at Maurice Newman,  feeling very superior, and doing namecalling, namecalling, all the way down. Get ready for the Sparrow-personality-test based on tenuous speculative associations with random three-word-phrases. This is the best of ABC-big-gov-lovin’  intelligensia.

The fireworks over Maurice Newman’s opinion on how the UN are using climate for their own powerhungry agenda continues. He not only spoke of “world government” he used the words “order”, “new”, and “world”. You and I thought these were simple words in the Oxford Dictionary, but lo, dumb punters, there is a special secret meaning Jeff Sparrow can reveal. Anyone who uses these words in the correct order is probably also a conspiracy theorist, paranoiac, gun nut, religious fanatic, and survivalist. All that psychoanalysis, and in just three words.

Maurice Newman raised a valid topic, but Sparrow ignores the issue, drops a smoke-bomb to distract loaded with namecalling. As mindless as it is, the ABC editors lapped it up. This is the way the big important issues of national importance get treated at the ABC. What is a geopolitical issue of the times becomes a chance to mock televangelists and books from 1987. Bread and circuses. Whatever you do, don’t talk about “World Government”.

Apparently Jeff Sparrow spends hours trawling the dark recesses of conspiracy-land on the Internet, since he’s so familiar with the terms. His mistake is to think that other people do that too. Is Maurice Newman that type? He has been the chair of the ASX, Chairman of Deutsche Bank (Australia), Chancellor of Macquarie Uni, Director of the ABC, Chairman of the Federal Treasurer’s Financial Sector Advisory Council, and the titles go on and on. Perhaps in his spare time at the Stock Exchange, or CHOGM and what not he was checking out Illuminati-Red-Alert sites, and watching UFO’s? Could be, or then again, he might just have been speaking English.

Check the evidence. When Newman spoke the magical phrase “new world order” he was talking about the possibility of the UN using the climate change scare to increase their power, transform economies, and establish an order that was “better than democracy”.

Maurice Newman, The Australian:

Figueres is on record saying democracy is a poor political system for fighting global warming. Communist China, she says, is the best model. This is not about facts or logic. It’s about a new world order under the control of the UN.

In strict English, this is definitely a potential world” arrangement, and “new” . It’s an “order” in nearly every transitive and intransitive sense of the word –  and several types of noun as well. But Sparrow is so deep into the conspiracy sites himself, he fantasizes the magic code phrase, *New World Order*, and the light goes off (and everything gets dark).

The real question (apart from “which ABC editor could possibly have approved this article?”) is whether Sparrow has read even one of the main skeptic sites. It appears his only news source is probably the ABC, which explains why he gets almost nothing right.

He thinks skeptics should all speak with One Voice, and argue the same arguments, just like unskeptical people do.

You can see those tropes play out today in the propaganda of today’s so-called climate sceptics, who cheerily embrace an array of mutually contradictory arguments against environmental action.

Climate change isn’t happening; it’s happening but it’s not caused by humans; it’s happening and it’s caused by humans but we should just adapt to it.

The God of Groupthink does not like  individuality.

And as for “climate change isn’t happening” — the only people who say that are the ones interpreting UN-Speak  the way the UN wants them too — their “climate change” does not mean climate change but “man-made global warming”.

Sparrow talks funding but is far behind the data. He only had to use google for something other than a “paranoiac” pursuit. (Go on, Jeff, search for “Climate Money” instead.)

… if scientists are being bribed to spout green rhetoric, where does that money come from?

Where indeed?  The money comes from the DoE, ARC, RCUK, NRC, and the Science Board, and it rolls in by the billions, 3500 times more than skeptics ever got. The EU have so much money, they don’t just fund unskeptical scientists, they fund unskeptical activists as well. As if they don’t already waste enough, they can also waste money from fossil fuels, and bankers too.

And the dismal 97% consensus studies should not have been done in the first place, and having been done so ineptly they should be withdrawn.  In any case, counting heads in science is just another proxy for funding. It isn’t science. No one asks if there is a consensus on gravity.

After all, the shemozzle around Lomborg’s outfit highlights the resources available to those who buck the climate consensus.

What resources? Lomborg doesn’t buck the climate consensus. He believes it — he just wants to spend their enviro-dollars more wisely, which is why they hate him.

Does anyone seriously believe that researchers definitively proving that polluters could continue burning up coal without any ill effects wouldn’t be deluged with grants and prizes and awards, both from industry and from government?

Sure, see Lomborg, Bjorn, and UWA. How easy is it for a believer to get funds to do skeptical sums about climate economics?  As easy as finding bikini’s at the South Pole. White ones.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
Rating: 9.3/10 (107 votes cast)
Maurice Newman, you are not allowed to say words like "order" "world" and "new" , 9.3 out of 10 based on 107 ratings

Tiny Url for this post: http://tinyurl.com/mbcpwjl

199 comments to Maurice Newman, you are not allowed to say words like “order” “world” and “new”

  • #

    In the universe of “progressives”, words are not tools of thought, understanding, or communication. They are weapons to be used to stop thought, understanding, and communication.

    For them, their words’ “true” meaning is held in a shimmering foggy unfocused vague terror arising from a life time of refusal to identify what is and fantasies that wishes make things real. Everything must be what it is not. Then when it is no longer what it is, it must become whatever it is named. Not being able to live in a real world that is what it is, they try to force everyone to live in a world that cannot be.

    Yet, what is, is. It is possible to know what it is but to do that, one must stay in contact with reality. Then one must use reason (the application of logic to experience and experiment) to know. Such knowledge does not and cannot arise from arbitrary dictate nor from any form of brute force. Reason must be free to function.

    Knowledge must be translated into words who’s meaning is the thing referred to by the word. One’s feelings, intentions, and motivations are what you make of them. They become successful to the degree they cohere to what is. This last thing is what the “progressives” fear the most and drives them to work to bind us all into being slaves to their whims.

    It won’t work, if by work you mean to live and thrive. Living and thriving is not what they seek. Their every thought, purpose, and action leads to failure and failure leads to death. That their ideas have failed through recorded history and long before, death is their goal. Their “gang” will achieve the poverty, despair, death, and destruction as has every “gang” has achieved before. The reason is they demand that reality is to be what it is not. That reduces to non existence.

    550

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      … words are not tools of thought, understanding, or communication. They are weapons to be used to stop thought, understanding, and communication.

      There are a number of Psychologists who specialise in the rehabilitation of prisoners of war, and especially those prisoners who have been extensively brain-washed.

      From what I have read, one of the apparent symptoms of brain-washing is that the victim can only accept a single meaning for any word, or phrase. That word or phrase therefore becomes synonymous with the “thing”, or “concept” being named, and the subsequent use of that word in conversation, invokes all of the emotions originally associated with the named “thing”, or “concept”.

      The “word” becomes the “object”, and the “object” is fully encapsulated within “The Word”. That is one of the reasons why it is still referred to as “Global Warming”, in preference to “Climate Change”, by the rusted-on extremists.

      We will never win the battle with the brian-washed foot soldiers, like Jeff Sparrow. There is a whole generation and a half of them.

      What we have to focus on, are people like Christina Figureres, who is well aware of what game is being played, and which rules are being applied, today.

      591

      • #
        Glen Michel

        Indeed we must overlook the “useful idiots” . “The Drum” is an ABC segment for the afformentioned. The planet is full of smug fools.

        70

        • #
          Bulldust

          Prat of the year contenders!

          I have a few running debates going – trying to be rational and aloof (in a good way) as much as possible. In one of the earlier posts I suggested people look at the Agenda 21 document and word search for the “$” and total up the amount:

          https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/content/documents/Agenda21.pdf

          I have had considerable ad homs thrown my way so far. Some of the lame efforts aimed at me so far:

          splod1: 12 May 2015 9:14:23am

          A wonderful post! I love the way in which your argument is consistent with your name. Truth in advertising: there should be more of it.

          and

          I Bogan: 12 May 2015 10:05:20am

          Yes. We must be alarmed. The lefties are out to get the free world. This is an existential threat!

          Climate change. Tobacco causing cancer. Asbestos. Immunisation. All leftie lies to destroy the market economy!!! Just read the posting hear Bulldust and “the other John”. So rational in their arguments. All highly qualified conspiracy theorists. They must be right. Farrrr right.

          90

          • #
            Bulldust

            I wonder if The Drum will allow Mr Newman a blog to reply to his echo chamber critics?

            I must be getting better, I typed that whole sentence without laughing out loud.

            60

      • #
        Ceetee

        Great post Rereke. Adding my two cents worth I’d say that Sparrow is not a foot soldier but an apparatchik. You see, I believe this is a silent war in many respects, silent like the ‘shy’ conservatives who gave Cameron an increased majority and raised serious questions about the entire pollster industry. In this age of increasing individual public scrutiny because of the digital age people are learning to withhold their private misgivings more than ever before. I believe most people are not impressed by the likes of Sparrow even if some can’t quite put a finger on why. Sparrow and his ilk convey their ideas in a certain way that turns people off, a preachy delivery that leaves the listener in no doubt they are being prescribed to in a patronising way. We are winning this silent war because people are silently rejecting this so called ‘consensus’. For evidence just look at the actions of the protagonists, not their words. For the vast majority of the worlds political elite AGW is tolerated and accommodated to a politically comfortable level. It is NOT resoundingly endorsed that’s for sure.

        60

      • #

        Oh the virtue of clarity
        if yer honest
        with nuthin’ter hide.
        No need ter obfuscate,
        unless truth’s not
        yer object, fer then,
        Sokals hoax shows us,
        that jargon’s yer modus
        operandi fer foolin’
        the crowd.

        30

      • #
        Just-A-Guy

        Rereke Whakaaro,

        You said:

        The “word” becomes the “object”, and the “object” is fully encapsulated within “The Word”.

        Ceetee said:

        In this age of increasing individual public scrutiny because of the digital age people are learning to withhold their private misgivings more than ever before.

        In our time, ‘The Word’, as you aptly reffer to it, is called a meme. Some come and go. Others tend to persist.

        I fully agree that we need to focus on people like Figueres because of their influence on todays youth. In a world where spouting rhetoric has become more important than rational debate, it’s people like her, with their skills at weaving a narrative based on ‘memes’ rather than engaging in a substantive discussion, that require our focus of attention.

        Great post Rereke. You sure know how to ‘cut to the chase’. ;)

        Abe

        10

    • #
      Roy Hogue

      In the universe of “progressives”, words are not tools of thought, understanding, or communication. They are weapons to be used to stop thought, understanding, and communication.

      When has it ever been otherwise? Demonizing your opponent goes back to the dawn of the human race. You don’t need today’s progressives to show you those tactics. The major problem today is the almost instant communication of TV the cellphone and the Internet — especially the Internet — that allows coordination among people who otherwise couldn’t keep their separate acts all in line with each other and the party line.

      When a large enough group of people decide they want a certain thing and the end justifies the means, it’s their ability to communicate that makes them so powerful — and so hard to counter.

      We’ve reached a point where the question has become critical — how far should we let them go on using our precious freedom of speech and our laws against us. No national foundation like the U. S. Constitution should be allowed to become a suicide pact.

      What is the answer to that? How far are we willing to let them go? How far are we willing to go?

      I can suggest at least two things. On the right we better get busy learning to use the same tools the left has used so effectively, communication and coordination. And we better start working toward a common well defined goal. And do these things soon.

      40

      • #
        Ceetee

        Roy, it’s hard to debate people on a rational level when so much of modern discourse is conducted in purely emotional levels. For most, AGW is an emotional issue because that is the only level of conscientious awareness they know it by.

        20

        • #
          Roy Hogue

          Yes, it is hard. That’s why we need to get going to counter the emotional, the immature, the dishonest, the incorrect, the irrational who manipulate the world like it was their private oyster. If we want our rational world back then we must get busy and take it back.

          What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. As cliche as that may be, it’s also true.

          10

          • #
            Ceetee

            That’s a big ask Roy. The world loves emotion.

            10

            • #
              Roy Hogue

              Ceetee,

              Yes. It is a big ask. No doubt about it. Emotion seems to be the major driver of decision making.

              On the other hand, we humans have this huge brain by comparison with any other species and I suspect our brain was intended to be the master and emotions the slave rather than the other way around.

              Nothing brought this home to me any better than learning to fly. I had a real SOB of an instructor who made me fight it out with every bad situation I got into and on top of that, intentionally put me in several bad situations to see how I would handle them. The only time he would offer help is if we were in immediate danger.

              On final approach one day with nowhere to go but to hit the ground short of the runway he suddenly shut down the engine and said, “What are you going to do?” With only seconds to deal with it I had no idea. As I was reaching for the knob to restore power he slapped my hand away, took over, put the nose sharply down to gain some airspeed and then popped us up over the fence and onto the pavement as neatly as if he’d planned the whole thing — which of course he had. He was just sitting there waiting to spring it on me when it was a critical problem. It was all over in about 15 seconds. It’s a lesson I’ll never forget. I was in panic mode when I should have been thinking.

              We don’t teach our children to rely thinking these days. We just teach them fear, fear of nearly everything. Everything around us these days says, be afraid of something. It’s nuts. But you’re right, the world loves emotion. Thinking isn’t on the agenda.

              00

  • #

    The attacks on Newman and Lomborg are very much in the same vain as the motivation for the Lewandowsky opinion polls. The left-consensus hold that their beliefs are a priori truths, including on climatology, politics and morals. It follows that any critics must be blinkered or outright liars. For the left there is no need to look up in a dictionary for word definitions, it is self-evident that they are right. There is no need to look at real world data to understand climate – a model based of the basic physics will tell the truths. There is no need to understand economics or technology to justify mitigation policies, as it is evident that they will be in line with the true policies. There is no need for democracy, as when the left “get their message across”, uncluttered by misinformation, everyone will vote for them.

    How great it would be if we could apply the left’s understanding to medicine. If all the experts agreed that cancer is a “bad thing“, this would give the moral vision to find a cure, without need of research. Medicines, of course, would have no adverse side effects, as bad things cannot come out of the correct moral vision.

    501

    • #
      Safetyguy66

      “It is one of the saddest spectacles of our time to see a great democratic movement support a policy which must lead to the destruction of democracy and which meanwhile can benefit only a minority of the masses who support it. Yet it is this support from the Left of the tendencies toward monopoly which make them so irresistible and the prospects of the future so dark.”

      ― Friedrich Hayek, The Road to Serfdom

      330

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        As I have said numerous times – bring on the Climate Nuremberg Trials…

        50

      • #

        Safetyguy66
        Thanks for that. I love quotes, and have long been an admirer of Hayek. One of Hayek’s most relevant works to understand climatology is his 1974 Nobel Lecture “The Pretense of Knowledge“. Whilst it deals with the particular problems of understanding economics, there are aspects that resonate with the issues of understanding climate. Cutting out the specific problems of economics, Hayek said

        While in the physical sciences it is generally assumed, probably with good reason, that any important factor which determines the observed events will itself be directly observable and measurable, ………. all the circumstances which will determine the outcome of a process, ………will hardly ever be fully known or measurable.

        Climate, like economics, is highly complex. Whilst I was at primary school in South London, I remember somebody saying of the weather:-

        A butterfly flapping its wings on the North Downs could cause a typhoon in the South China Sea.

        An exaggeration perhaps, but contains an essential truth that no matter how much we measure climate, we will only have a minute proportion if the total complexity of what is happening in the real world, and that small part very imperfectly. Even then, most of the available information is smoothed out, or homogenized, to fit into the very limited understanding of the climatology.
        Much of the effects in climate are so far removed from the single or multiple causes, they will never be known. The true climate skeptic will follow Hayek when he said in the same lecture

        I confess that I prefer true but imperfect knowledge, even if it leaves much indetermined and unpredictable, to a pretence of exact knowledge that is likely to be false.

        20

        • #
          Just-A-Guy

          Kevin Marshall (Manicbeancounter), Safetyguy66,

          And thank you both for that. (those?)

          It’s comments like these that I enjoy the most. New information on an old topic, each time from a different angle. Widens the perspective.

          Abe

          20

          • #
            Safetyguy66

            Cheers

            When you consider Hayek’s references were aimed at the worst excesses of the second world war in terms of the propensity of socialism to become totalitarianism through a process of fractional regulation. The boiling frog concept.

            It should worry anyone who reads history to see that Hayek’s words could quite easily have been written yesterday.

            20

  • #
    Yonniestone

    If the implementation of a global democracy/one world government is such a good scenario which benefits everyone then why not be open about it and lay it out for all to see?

    It’s a very poor business model that’s presented with shady details, rudeness, over aggression, condescending, shoddy math and suspect returns.

    500

  • #
    Jaymez

    Christina Figueres, executive secretary of the UNFCCC, could not have been more clear in stating what is being proposed is by any definition, a new world order.
    http://www.unric.org/en/latest-un-buzz/29623-figueres-first-time-the-world-economy-is-transformed-intentionally

    “This is probably the most difficult task we have ever given ourselves, which is to intentionally transform the economic development model, for the first time in human history, Ms Figueres stated at a press conference in Brussels. Figueres is the Executive Secretary of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) who has been setting the agenda for the UN Climate Change conferences.

    “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the industrial revolution. That will not happen overnight and it will not happen at a single conference on climate change, be it COP 15, 21, 40 – you choose the number. It just does not occur like that. It is a process, because of the depth of the transformation.”

    (my bolding)

    Maurice Newman can only be dismissed as some whacko conspiracy theorists if you deliberately choose to ignore the facts. Which is of course something the climate alarmists have been doing for years. Ignoring or adjusting!

    PS: Jo, I think you have done your typical understated plea for financial support in your last post. You need it, you should ask more bluntly. I am sure there are many more readers like me who greatly appreciate your work (and indeed that of your other half Dr David Evans), and are happy to send you some financial support by clicking here.

    331

  • #
    Another Ian

    Jo

    Another flak watch.

    ABC radio around 6am (east Aust) banging on about new CSIRO findings of the missing acceleration in sea level rise – now in line with IPCC projections.

    I part heard and didn’t get details of who and where

    90

    • #
      Safetyguy66

      Tasmanian team have managed to fiddle the data to make it look even worse basically. Its another exercise is flattening past records to make current wildly inaccurate measurements look scarier. ABC are having a special celebration this morning, impending doom makes them happy.

      201

      • #
        el gordo

        Just had a glimpse on the ABC breakfast show and it seems they have tried an old trick, lower the past to raise the future.

        Their disgraceful attempt to get SLR back up to speed can now easily be accepted by the faithful.

        140

      • #
        Truthseeker

        Tony Heller over at Real Science is on top of it as usual …

        Visualising Global Sea Level Fraud, part 1.

        Visualising Global Sea Level Fraud, part 2.

        51

      • #
        Bushkid

        Hardly a surprise with Paris this year supposed to be the make or break time for the world warmist brigade to sign us all into serfdom. We’ve already been seeing it, 6 months to go and the silliness will only get worse. In a way I hope they keep piling the junk pronouncements and predictions on thicker and sillier, even the most rusted-on wooly headed believers must eventually see that all the “predictions” and “projections” can’t possibly happen, particularly when so many of them seem to be contradictory. Given the unexciting empirical (un-homogenised, unadjusted, un-fudged) observations in the real world to date, one conjectures that the IPCC and doomsayers and oracles (flummery et al) know full well that they are wrong, but are hyping the warmist panic pronouncements to the max to scare “the masses” into panicking their gummints into signing up to their own demise in December.

        130

      • #
        OriginalSteve

        Wellt hat sort of settles the debate as to whether they would back off quietly or go double or nothing……

        Now all we have to do is keep speaking the truth and they will have to either arrest us, lock us all up or something worse….

        Will one day Sceptics be holding debates while incarcerated on Naru?

        00

    • #
  • #
    handjive

    Jonova uses the word “sceptic”.

    With John Cook’s denial 101x course, the 97% consensus are now attempt to reclaim this word “sceptic”, realising, too late, that it
    was ‘high ground’ in the climate wars.

    That genie won’t go back in the bottle, no matter how many brainwashing courses for the gullible Cook runs.

    They dismissed this word ‘sceptic’ years ago, and history is littered with them denying they are ‘sceptical’:

    > Al Gore likens skeptics to racists, homophobes and violent alcoholics (video via wuwt)

    Then Tim Wirth had this to say during the live video feed: “Skeptics are ‘truly evil people
    Former Senator Tim Wirth (the guy who turned off the air conditioning and opened the windows at Hansen’s global warming hearing in June 1988)

    > Tim Flannery sets the record straight: I am not a climate sceptic. (theage.com)

    > Even “the stoat” aka William M. Connolley in 2014:
    “Every man and his dog has their own pet explanation of the greenhouse effect.

    If you’re not a “skeptic”, and you can cope fairly easily with the maths and with S-B, then … yada yada yada …”
    ~ ~ ~
    John Cook, reddit:
    “iii. Science does need to be disprovable, that’s what distinguishes it from pseudoscience.
    What would turn me into a climate skeptic?

    I already am a climate skeptic because skepticism is a good thing – skeptics consider the body of evidence before coming to a conclusion (sorry, I know that’s just semantics but it’s an important point).”
    . . .
    But skeptics are evil. They are racists, homophobes and violent alcoholics Skeptics are stupid and can’t do maths or S-B.

    151

    • #
      Dave N

      “Science does need to be disprovable..”

      Except for CAGW apparently, since no serious alarmist has ever come up with what conditions would actually disprove it.

      301

      • #
        James Bradley

        Dave,

        That would be an excellent question to put to them.

        90

      • #
        Manfred

        Absolutely spot on. Asking believers what it would take to falsify their hypothesis usually proves revealing, or at a push, merely entertaining.

        50

    • #
      Matty

      ” “iii. Science does need to be disprovable, that’s what distinguishes it from pseudoscience.
      What would turn me into a climate skeptic?
      I already am a climate skeptic because skepticism is a good thing ”

      Glad to see he’s learned something about science along the way. Learned from Academia or from sceptics ? Wearing it like an emperors cloak. All the more to bamboozle you with my dear. Heh, heh, heh.

      00

  • #
    James Bradley

    I’m sceptical of claims that Antarctic ice is melting because of climate change when I read Antarctic research scientists are requesting better icebreakers because of increasing Antarctic sea ice.

    http://www.news.com.au/national/breaking-news/forecasting-sea-ice-to-save-scientists/story-e6frfku9-1227350248988

    291

    • #
      Bushkid

      Yes James, but if you read the story in the Oz today to the end, you’ll see that the warmitsas are still saying it’s because of gerbil worming, caused by (if I recall correctly) ozone depletion, greenhouse gasses and natural variability, or words to that effect. Funny how CO2 suddenly didn’t get a mention, and natural variability suddenly does. Sounds like they know they’ve lost the debate and are desperately trying to hedge their bets while still blaming the nasty global warming monster.

      90

    • #
      Matty

      The weather has always been a favourite ice breaker. I wonder what they use at UNSW gatherings ?

      10

  • #
    Safetyguy66

    I have to say I am over this notion Lomberg has anything valuable to contribute and Im really surprised the soft ride hes getting on this site.

    “What resources? Lomborg doesn’t buck the climate consensus. He believes it — he just wants to spend their enviro-dollars more wisely, which is why they hate him.”

    Really? “more wisely”? How would that work exactly?

    Like I said. This is a guy who believes without question the notion we are creating climate Armageddon in our lifetimes. His solution is to build only 3 wind turbines instead of 7 to counter it. Hes actually worse than the deep greens who at least you can respect for being committed to their delusion. Please stop patting this nit wit on the back and call him for the warmist parasite he is.

    /rant off

    Also we are back to measuring sea level rises in + or – .x of a mm now. Seriously?? How does this even get traction? We are seeing statements on the ABC this morning like “fastest rate of rise this century”. We don’t have the data, the techniques or the tools to even backup that claim. How is this nonsense getting so much air??

    291

    • #
      Greg Cavanagh

      How is this nonsense getting so much air??

      Because they want to believe it. It’s that simple.

      As for new world order. I’ve read over the years many prominent people say they want it, and many more saying they are working toward it. I don’t see why they get so upset about it quite honestly.

      85

    • #
      Bushkid

      “How is this nonsense getting so much air??

      Paris, December 2015.

      That’s how. Every possible deceitful tactic will be employed to try to force the outcome lusted after by those black hearted, misanthropic individuals who think they deserve or have the right to be our masters.

      80

    • #
      Rod Stuart

      Tassie should be a bad place to argue sea level rise. All that is necessary to refute it is to go have a look at the 100 year old tide mark on the Isle of the Dead.

      110

    • #
      Manfred

      How is this nonsense getting so much air?

      (Safetyguy66 @ # 8)

      [Words] are weapons to be used to stop thought, understanding, and communication.

      (Lionell @ # 1)

      The freshly elected government of the UK appear desirous of taking on the BBC.

      High time the broadcasting eco-marxist crowd were called out.

      We shall see.

      60

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘I have to say I am over this notion Lomberg has anything valuable to contribute and Im really surprised the soft ride hes getting on this site.’

      I know hardened green leftoids who have visited this blog because of the Lomborg saga and they are a little confused.

      They are under the impression that Lmborg is a member of the Denialati, which is simply not true, so it maybe time to put the boot into him. Confusion would then reign and we might get a decent debate going.

      40

    • #
      Rod Stuart

      Tassie should be a bad place to argue sea level rise. All that is necessary to refute it is to go have a look at the 100 year old tide mark on the Isle of the Dead.

      20

  • #
    James Bradley

    I’m also sceptical when I read the ABC reports Tasmanian scientists claim sea level rise has accelerated over the last twenty years and the sea level is expected to rise 98cm in the next 85 years unless drastic mitigation reduces green houses gasses drastically.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-12/sea-level-rise-accelerates-faster-in-past-20-years/6461752

    91

    • #
      Safetyguy66

      John Church of the CSIRO reprises the popular role of King Canute in his latest study on sea levels.

      “If we have major mitigation, then we can limit that rise to be somewhere between 30 and 60 centimetres during the 21st century,” he said.

      He then sentenced the sea to 30 lashes.

      122

    • #

      They tried the same with Perth a few years back, until we showed them, with Chris Gilham and Warwick Hughes’ help, that the coastal plain was sinking due to the depletion of the aquifer for Perth’s water supply.

      00

  • #
    Robert O

    Shouldn’t the debate about global warming be about temperature readings not opinion? These apparently haven’t risen for 18 years, if one accepts the more accurate unbiased satellite data rather than “homogenised” land based data which only represents a third of the planet anyhow! And as to a mathematically significant relationship to levels of carbon dioxide there is none.

    151

    • #
      Safetyguy66

      Stone the blasphemer!!

      60

    • #
      sophocles

      Robert O:

      Shouldn’t the debate about global warming be about temperature readings not opinion?

      Eh? But but but, why? “The science is settled!” So who needs those pesky readings?

      I came across this interesting article yesterday when I was checking the last few days space weather (aka solar activity). The north magnetic pole has picked up its skirts and really been skedaddling on its attempted migration to Siberia. I found the consideration its peregrination

      is the real culprit behind climate change

      interesting, but can’t immediately see a possible mechanism. I have yet to check the south magnetic pole for its recent wanderings.

      I can just see the Alarmist’s fastening on an “imminent field reversal” as a bigger danger than CAGW. Of course, the geological record suggests nothing of the sort, but it might make a fun diversion…

      00

  • #
    pattoh

    The QE Chickens look like they are coming home to roost.

    So it looks like the global currency in Carbon Credits under the UN will be beaten to the punch by a Keynsian Banco or some such tied to the SDR Basket via quasi gold from China’s big pot anyway.

    http://kingworldnews.com/is-this-the-most-shocking-interview-of-2015/

    30

  • #
    Oksanna

    From the ABC report:
    “Now, once we make a correction for how much land motion is at the tide gauge, or how much it’s moving up and down, we’re able to get a better picture….”

    That says it all really, oh, and that John Church was a coauthor. Let’s just put it this way. They found what they were looking for.

    71

  • #
    Retired now

    Sell the ABC and the SBS. I don’t see why a country that has voted in a conservative government should have to pay for left wing media speak (my auto-correct kept trying to turn speak into spew, perhaps more accurately).

    120

    • #
      el gordo

      The trouble with selling off the ABC and SBS is that half the population (the brainwashed) will think this is a conservative plot, a fascist coup, so it will do nothing to help our cause.

      Best course of action is to get balance in the newsroom, which would also receive flak but nothing we couldn’t handle. In this way we could get a debate going, within the organisations and out in the street.

      30

      • #
        Retired now

        They might think that but at least we aren’t paying for their beliefs to be affirmed.

        I don’t think its possible to get newsroom/editorial balance – lefties in charge, lefties working their think its balanced already, so balance as we would perceive it just wouldn’t happen. Would have to start with a completely different set up, staff and ethos.

        00

        • #
          el gordo

          You might be right Retired, so we may need different option. Maurice Newman tried to bring about change when he was there, but to no avail, so I suggest the Cameron solution.

          ‘Downing Street sources said the appointment of Mr Whittingdale, a former aide to Margaret Thatcher and a stalwart of the Tory right, reflected Mr Cameron’s desire to include all sections of the party in his government.

          ‘Tory figures said that the choice of a stern critic of the BBC to head the department which oversees broadcasting also reflected anger at its perceived bias during the election campaign.

          “This isn’t about the wholesale destruction of the BBC — far from it — but it’s about requiring the corporation to take a long hard look at itself, the job it is doing, the way it is funded and whether it is fit for purpose,” one said.

          10

  • #
    Ruairi

    With the media as play-back recorder,
    For the U.N.they guard as a warder,
    As they thrive on the view,
    That some words are taboo,
    Such as these three;New,World and Order.

    230

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      I thought to myself, this morning, “Ha! Let’s see what Ruairi makes of this little lot?”

      And there you are. You have exceeded yourself, and proven my cynicism wrong, once again.

      50

    • #
      Ceetee

      OK Ruairi, gloves are off!

      Behold the ABC Sparrow
      In defence of his straight and his narrow
      for this little bird
      to peck at a word
      to uphold his sacred and hallowed!

      50

  • #
    Rereke Whakaaro

    Item from Radio New Zealand International, May 11, 2015. [Transcribed without alteration or comment]

    More than one million people are expected to pass through a pavilion for Tuvalu at one of the world’s most prestigious contemporary art exhibitions — the 56th Venice Biennale.

    The pavilion, by Taiwanese artist Vincent Huang, contains a turquoise pool that is crossed by two paths that submerge slightly when walked across, which Mr Huang says represents the plight of Tuvalu in facing rising sea levels caused by climate change.

    Mr Huang says he hopes the massive crowd expected at the biennale will learn of the challenges Tuvalu is facing as a result of a problem it did little to create.

    “I started to create to assist the tiny island nation to get more international attention. The theme of this year’s Venice Biennale is ‘all the world’s future.’ So it’s a sinking nation combined with a sinking city, which is Venice here.”

    Vincent Huang says he was inspired by a speech by, Ian Fry, Tuvalu’s representative at the 2009 UN climate change conference in Denmark, in which he said, “the fate of my country rests in your hands.”

    20

    • #
      James Bradley

      That explains the unprecedented sea level rise in Tasmania, it’s all Tuvalu’s fault for sinking.

      60

      • #
        Rereke Whakaaro

        I keep telling people, sea level is not an absolute measurement. It is only relative to the point where the tide gauge is mounted. Since water finds its own mean level, Occam’s Razor would say that Tasmania is sinking.

        But let us not get our hopes up too high.

        50

    • #
      James Bradley

      Say how much particulate matter falls into the oceans each year to help sea level rise.

      20

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      I am left wondering how many pairs of expensive ladies silk-covered Venetian shoes will be ruined, by the dear ladies getting their feet wet?

      Typical climate mumbo-jumbo — they never seem to think ahead, or outside of their own experiences.

      30

    • #
      OriginalSteve

      But is it art?

      10

    • #
      Ceetee

      Mr Huang needs a day job.

      00

  • #
    Ursus Augustus

    Poor little Jeff
    In dreams an eco eagle
    At dawn just fffff

    20

  • #
    Tim

    Sparrow’s: ‘a key phrase in the lexicon of paranoiacs’…


    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txukr5zgHnw

    20

  • #
    Interested

    Thank you Joanne.
    Both your posts about the Maurice Newman story are exactly ‘on the money’, as usual.

    I’ve read stuff about UFOs and other things over the years and recognised the dangers of slipping into a conspiracy-theory mindset. If you were to believe everything you read, you’d descend into madness … fairies at the bottom of the garden and all that.

    But I know enough of science to have spotted the obvious flaws in ‘Climate Science’, as they laughingly call it these days.
    Back in 2008/9 it was clear to anyone with the barest inkling of how science works that Global Warming was NOT valid science.
    Yet we were being force-fed a constant diet of propaganda about it from all sources.

    It was at that stage, with all the bells in my BS Detector ringing loudly, that I was asking why this was happening.
    It became apparent that so many people in authority, making so many obviously false statements about weather and climate, couldn’t all be simply mistaken.
    It HAD TO BE deliberate.

    All of a sudden I was in conspiracy-theory territory … BIG TIME.
    If all these authority figures were singing from the same erroneous hymn sheet, there was no logical alternative but to recognise something big was happening.
    And this time it couldn’t be dismissed as overwrought imaginings.
    The shocking thing? … IT’S ACTUALLY REAL!

    I contend that Maurice Newman, Dr David Evans, Dr Roy Spencer, our Joanne (God bless her), and so many others whose views tend not to make it into the MSM, are quite correct.
    Obama, Cameron, Merkel, Ban-Ki Moon, etc., all stand up and spout demonstrable lies. Not because they don’t know what they’re saying is wrong, but because they know perfectly well they’re lying for their own purposes.

    Logic leads inescapably to the conclusion that powerful political forces are at work on an astonishing scale. And the very fact that these forces base their advancement on the dissemination of lies and the debasement of our most cherished achievement, the scientific method, bodes ill for the future if they should succeed.

    I believe the results of centuries of struggle which have led to a fairer and more prosperous world, for more of us than ever before, are in the process of being destroyed.
    The forces of Stalinist totalitarianism are back!
    In fact, they never really went away.
    But this time it’s global.

    I think we’re alarmingly close to the edge of a precipice, and yet most people are unaware of the terrible danger.

    [Incidentally, sometimes people put unnecessary apostrophes into plurals. For example, one might be saying: "As easy as finding bikini’s at the South Pole."
    No apostrophe required.
    Pedants notice trivialities like that and obsess over them for no good reason. They probably need to get out more.]

    212

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘I think we’re alarmingly close to the edge of a precipice, and yet most people are unaware of the terrible danger.’

      Its like being in a science fiction movie, a small band of rational coolists attempt to warn the masses that global cooling is imminent.

      To your list I’ll add David Archibald, Scafetta and Dr Norman Page.

      70

    • #
      Gordon Alderson

      Greg Hunt definitely needs to be included among those who “…stand up and spout demonstrable lies. Not because they don’t know what they’re saying is wrong, but because they know perfectly well they’re lying for their own purposes.”

      50

    • #
      Rick Will

      I think you are giving too much credit to polies. Why wouldn’t Tony Abbott be in on the conspiracy if there was one among the people you list. Abbott tested the water with climate change and found it would be suicide to take the line Newman has taken. It would be worse for him than the Prince Philip knightship debacle.

      I also think there is a very limited number of people able to find the scientific flaws in what that the IPCC produce. Their disregard for science is shown by still having things like these web pages in operation:

      https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/faq-1-1.html

      The chart showing massive backward radiation from cold to hot is still there.

      https://www.ipcc.ch/publications_and_data/ar4/wg1/en/faq-1-3.html

      The notion of a greenhouse effect is pedalled so strongly that everyone not trained in thermodynamics freely use that term. The science is accurately described as an atmospheric effect – nothing to do with all this greenhouse nonsense.

      And yet I would say a tiny fraction of the population, including the scientific community, cheerfully accept the fairy tale of man made CO2 causing global warming.

      A few years ago there was a debate raging across the physics community over whether a vehicle could go faster than the wind directly downwind. Commonly referred to as DDWFTTW. A couple of guys in California got so fed up with the nonsense about it defying all known laws of thermodynamics (university professors included) that they went out and did it. The story is here:
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DPvGTjmn9y0
      If you google DDWFTTW you will get thousands of web pages voted to this debate. The poor understanding displayed by many academics and apparently knowledgeable people did not surprise me. Throughout my working career I have seen educated people who passed all the exams to get where they were really having limited thinking ability and very limited ability in working outside the box they were taught.

      At present the IPCC has the momentum. I expect they will do all they can to sustain the momentum till Paris so the ongoing funding is locked in. That will bankroll the story telling for another 5 years or more until reality of global cooling finally takes hold. Funding underpins authority and the type of people who get appointments to the UN enjoy the associated power.

      60

      • #
        el gordo

        ‘Abbott tested the water with climate change and found it would be suicide to take the line Newman has taken.’

        Its true, which is why Greg Hunt is where he is. Abbott knows the science is crap, but lacks the political will to admit it.

        ‘That will bankroll the story telling for another 5 years or more until reality of global cooling finally takes hold.’

        In that case there’s only a couple of years left in this scam.

        30

  • #
    Rick Will

    ABC is fighting fire with water:
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-12/australian-researchers-find-sea-level-rise-is/6462224

    I have some recollection this story has been out before but it was trotted out on the ABC 24 news this morning.

    This is an absolute classic story in the light of the temperature “homogenisation”. Here the 1990 tide readings are being lowered to increase the rate of rise over the last two decades. Hence it shows an acceleration – just like the IPCC predicted. So data records are being amended to fit the theory.

    This now explains how the massive 92bn tonnes loss of ice from Antarctica annually is accelerating sea level rise. As if 0.2mm a year is discernible on tide gauges over two decades.

    70

  • #
    Robert of Ottawa

    But if you apply a new word order to order world new you get … taraa! new world order.

    40

  • #
    handjive

    the conversation displays it’s ignorance & bias:

    Maurice Newman: mad, bad or sad?

    “The fact is, as Robert Manne among others has pointed out, that the Murdoch press generally and The Australian in particular really do give a lot of space to climate contrarians, sceptics and outright denialists, such as Newman.”
    . . .
    There is that “sceptic” word again.
    John Cook claims he is one.

    30

    • #

      “sceptic” isn’t far removed from “septic”.

      30

    • #
      Manfred

      handjive, I admire you ability to stomach that euphemistically named site. Even in homeopathic doses it belongs on a deadly toxic drug register.

      30

    • #
      me@home

      HJ, I’m not sure whether or not to thank you for sending me to The Conversation (Not Allowed) where the only dissenting voice I found was from someone claiming that the ABC and Fairfax are biased to the right. And, for some jerk from UWA, of all places, quoting the notorious Robert Manne as an authority on anything at all.

      20

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘It begs the question of what motivates Maurice? Does he have children, grandchildren?’

      That is pathetic.

      The only reasonable thing the author said was that Maurice is winning.

      10

    • #
      Glen Michel

      A lot of people over at the conversion seem to think Fairfax and ABC have a right-wing bias.wow

      00

  • #

    The problem for anyone commenting on MNs utterances and writings is that they are not backed up. It doesn’t matter if he is authoritative or trustworthy or not generally a conspiracy theorist, this does not make his comments anything more than assertions. This is the problem for Sparrow, Beeson and others who want to dispute Newman’s statements; you can’t easily disprove an assertion and you need to make various inferences and assumption in order to even comment. Which also makes everything written above a bunch of how air about hot air. And so with what I just wrote.

    25

    • #
      manalive

      “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for the, at least, 150 years, since the industrial revolution,” Figueres said.

      What do you think the good lady means by that?

      61

    • #
      el gordo

      ‘The problem for anyone commenting on MNs utterances and writings is that they are not backed up.’

      It doesn’t matter, he is appealing to the ordinary person in the street who has little knowledge of the debate. Maurice Newman is generating discussion in the cafes and around the water cooler at work, this is the best we can hope for.

      Maurice Newman is a formidable intellectual with the courage to explain reality, which is against the warmist faith, so he is roundly condemned by the left.

      And while we are at it, do you still believe CO2 causes global warming?

      60

      • #

        There is evidence that he is exorcising the usual media outlets and their commenters but I suspect while you hope this is true, you actually have no evidence

        Maurice Newman is generating discussion in the cafes and around the water cooler at work

        27

        • #
          Rereke Whakaaro

          First comes the experiment, thence comes the observations, thence comes the data, thence comes the evidence. You can’t claim to start with evidence, in science … although, some do try.

          You have to start a conversation, in order to get agreement and mutual understanding. That is what is happening in the cafes and around the water cooler.

          50

          • #
            Gee Aye

            Oh? I bet they are not though.

            17

          • #
            Roy Hogue

            Sometimes the observations are sufficient to start the process toward the end result, evidence and sound conclusions. The observations can be enough by themselves or can lead to a good experiment to determine what’s actually going on. If the global warming advocates had simply started with what they can see and measure every day — observation — the world might never have heard the term, global warming.

            You do need to have the conversations going on, conversations in which all participants actually listen to each other. Dream on, Roy.

            20

        • #
          el gordo

          ‘…you actually have no evidence.’

          Anecdotal evidence not good enough for you, I’m doing a straw poll as we speak.

          Do you believe, in light of the observational evidence, that CO2 causes global warming?

          41

    • #
      GMac

      Anyone without really trying can find many references to a “new world order” by the actual people who are tasked with assisting its creation and I don’t mean the conspiracy sites.
      George Bush snr,Tony Blair,Bob Hawke(the ALP stated in it’s Constitution and Rules Platform of 1982),and that’s just a quick find.
      It’s coming and we have no say or control in the matter all we can do is make the most of whatever eventuates,which is what the world’s population has had to do over the millennia.
      Me personally I am a Christian and |I know that there is a much better change coming unfortunately there is going to be a very dark period before that change,the 1930′s/40′s are going to look like a sunday school picnic compared to the hatred and war that is coming.

      00

      • #
        Richard of NZ

        One early reference to “new world order” is the paper by Herbert George, the Well known rabid sociallist, from 1940. It explains all that is to be the “new world order” and how it should be obtained.

        Perhaps commemtary on this somewhat famous writer is to be banned.

        00

  • #
    ROM

    There will never be a One World Government;star comment

    There WILL BE a very large number of power hungry, pseudo go gooder, merciless in the brutal imposition of their own beliefs and ideology, third and fourth rate wannabe fascist proto dictators of every type, rank and utter despicableness into the far foreseeable future who will endeavor to become mankind’s supreme Overlord.

    The experts are still arguing about what constitutes a nation but there are about 193 nation states on the planet.

    Nearly everyone of those nation states have internal dissension within them which may even be of the relatively peaceful kind such as here in Oz but for most nation states there is a whole range of internal disputation and revolts going from a few riots right up to full scale national wars leading to the splitting up of nations into two or more new nations.
    Czechoslovakia split up peacefully into the Czech Republic and the Slovakia , about the only nation to do so relatively peacefully in recent times.
    The Serbs and Croats fought a horrible vicious war leading to the breakup of Yugoslavia.

    Sudan, formerly the largest nation in Africa in area and the only nation in Africa larger in area than Western Australia [ WA in land area comes in as the tenth largest country on Earth if it was a nation in it's own right ] split violently in a full war situation between the Islamic Arab north and the animist / christian negroid south.

    India’s eastern territories have an ongoing civil war sputtering along as the Communistic Naxalites try to gain power in its Eastern provinces.

    South America’s numerous armed rebellions have been well publicised.

    China has a significant low visibility armed rebellion almost a civil war going on it’s far western provinces as the local Uighur peoples revolt as the Hans from eastern China move in and take the power and spoils. Likewise in Tibet where an ongoing low visibility revolt is continuing over the un-wanted, heavy handed Chinese dictatorship.

    The list goes on to cover most nations on this planet.

    At an even more local level witness the disputes which in some countries, the Middle East at the moment being the prime example of major internal conflict as numerous groups, ethnic, religious, socialistic or just plain power hungry and dictatorial driven all trying to gain power over one another.

    Come down the social ladder to an even lower rung and witness and maybe be a part of local disputes right down to family level.

    Nobody will ever hold power over most of mankind let alone ALL of mankind for any more than a very brief period. 

    We as a species are far too aggressive and war like in our race’s psychology to bow down as a entire species to one Overlord.
    There will always be a very high percentage of humans who will refuse to kowtow to any one major Overlord or to any Overlord at all regardless of that Overlord’s governing style, be it generous and with a soft touch, something that is very, very rare in dictatorships at any level.
    Or oft as usual, harsh, brutal and deadly to millions.

    The Soviet Union with it’s communist ideology tried it under the guise of a universal human leveling ideology that existed in name only.
    The disparate group of nations under the forcibly imposed Soviet dictatorship lasted some 70 years, about a human lifetime for the original nations that the communists gained power over.
    And for about 45 years for the nations that the Soviet Russians gained hegemony over by military force after the end of WW2.

    The Romans came closest with an empire or what was eventually only a semblance of an Empire that lasted for some 2000 years in name at least.
    But even they ran into the very powerful tribes of the east who refused to bow down to the Roman Emperor’s legions and who limited, through warfare, quite marked limits on the extent that Rome’s Empire could expand to.

    Those who believe in and are promoting and pushing quite forcibly for one world government under say the UN auspices are truly trying a sexual act on themselves.
    History has repeatedly shown us that where a significant differences in ethnicity, race, physical characteristics, language, culture, skin colour, standards of living, work ethics, morals and etc and etc come into play then there are much greater difficulties involved in trying to govern the whole of that collection of humanity, a difficulty in governing any sizeable collection of peoples that is now seemingly becoming a more and more marked development in all large nation states.

    I look back at history and see just how little there was in stifling, innovation destroying rules, regulations and laws other than the basic laws of human behaviour and expectation from your fellow citizens in the 1800′s and early 1900′s when the fast paced inventing and development of mankind’s most basic inventions and innovations both created and set in place the criteria to build and develop the world we now live in.

    Today as our numbers have doubled and doubled again we at least here in the west, the developed world, are now close to being crippled by the sheer weight and volume of the grossly restrictive laws and near impenetrable thickets of rules and regulations that have grown up around our formerly immensely innovative and productive western civilisation and the minutiae of innumerable, inflexible rules and regulations that are now choking and crippling the innovation and developments that were the great drivers of our civilisation’s rise in the very recent past times.

    Perhaps one day somebody will actually sit down and using all the information that is becoming so readily available today, will calculate the approximate maximum size of a comfortably governable sized number of citizens.

    And that would be the optimum for the maximum sized fully and easily governable nation, a nation that would still maintain it’s innovative culture and a nation that was still capable of bring out the best in it’s citizens whilst being small enough in numbers to ensure that all would have a say in the running of that nation.

    The UN is an anachronism that is still useful as a forum for nations to get together to talk and negotiate.
    Had that not been the case then the UN would have been disappeared a couple of decades ago.

    What has happened with the UN is that it has been allowed to far outgrow it’s intent and purpose as its bureacracy under any and every guise, extends its tentacles ever further into nations affairs, mostly at the behest of the smaller less innovative , often dictator ruled nations that have the most to gain by imposing restrictions and imposts on the larger democratic developed nations.

    The UN has become a vast propaganda entity which no nation on the face of it, can now afford to renounce but it is very, very vulnerable to just one major nation pulling the pin on the whole UN debacle, just as happened when Japan and a couple of other nations withdrew from the pre WW2 League of Nations thus destroying it’s rationale for its existence and which then subsequently collapsed.

    As for the UN becoming the supreme Overlord and governing all nations!
    History is very clear on this point.
    It just won’t happen.

    Human perversity and self interest at both the personal and national levels will see to that in no uncertain fashion.

    221

    • #
      diogenese2

      ROM, once again you call out the Emperors’ wardrobe deficiency. Isn’t it always so that the most blatantly obvious is the least visible. World government is a fantasy, the wet dream of latter day gods oblivious to their own impotence. The UN exists only as a forum for independent states whose mutual interest is their own survival, as you recognise. Almost all world armed conflict (which is at the lowest level of my entire life – mind you I started at the top – 1942)is civil strife within states. Christine Figueres does not work for the UN but for UNFCCC which is answerable to the 196 Parties.
      You raise the profound issue of the maximum (or perhaps optimal) size of a governable nation. But you had the answer, it depends on the flow and availability of information, which both controls and liberates. Success is in achieving an equilibrium (which doesn’t happen – 2nd law rules -OK.).
      Actually the UN bureaucracy only reflects that of its members, for the same reasons. and don’t imagine for a minute that “smaller, less innovative, often dictator ruled nations” are going to impose anything on the big players. Beggers are not choosers.

      41

    • #
      Glen Michel

      Wisdom borne out by observation.

      00

    • #
      Ceetee

      ROM, the optimal size for a national population is approximately 3 – 4 million. Nudge nudge wink wink.

      00

  • #
    lmwd

    Most of the commenters on the Sparrow article have missed what it was all about and it’s degenerated into the usual tit for tat alarmist (mostly) versus skeptic arguments.

    The comment I posted, for the second time, but which I doubt will be let through is below:

    The author of this article, Jeff Sparrow, has studiously avoided repeating the actual words of Figueres, which should alert any curious person to go and dig a little deeper. Instead he satisfies himself with bashing Newman who had taken the time to consider what she is advocating, which most in a liberal democratic society, built on an economic model that provides the wealth most of us take for granted, would find concerning. Unless of course you’re a fan of Communism, an alternative economic model.
    For the record she said the following:
    “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.”
    The funny thing about these words, which do suggest Figueres has something of a Bob Brown mad glint in her eye, is that there are a couple of examples from the 20th Century when someone, usually a dictator, intentionally changed the economic development model of their country. Some names to consider: Lenin and Mao. But then, she is also on record as being a fan of China’s system of elite bureaucrats who paternalistically control everything. What does China do with dissenters BTW?
    It’s amusing that when Bob Brown openly talked his aspiration for a “One World Government”, the left attacked, not the clearly bonkers Brown, but anyone stupid enough to quote his words as part of their (justified) critique.
    Jeff, how about you engage intelligently with the actual words of Figueres complete with their unambiguous intentions? Perhaps you could watch one of her interviews where she advocates increased centralisation and global regulation? Or is a discussion of development economics intellectually beyond you? When you’re finished doing some discourse analysis on Figueres words, below are some other quotes for you to consider:
    “No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits…. climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.” (Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister)

    “We’ve got to ride the global-warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” (Timothy Wirth, U.S./UN functionary, former elected Democrat Senator)

    “A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the greenhouse effect.” (Richard Benedik, former U.S./UN bureaucrat)

    160

    • #
      lmwd

      Just as an experiment I replied to one person and asked them what they thought of Figueres’ quote. I wanted to see if the moderators would actually let her own words through or are they protecting their mushroom like commenters so they’ll carry on Newman bashing. I bet you most of them haven’t even read the Newman article as it would be behind a paywall.

      50

  • #
    Manfred


    “This is the first time in the history of mankind that we are setting ourselves the task of intentionally, within a defined period of time, to change the economic development model that has been reigning for at least 150 years, since the Industrial Revolution.” Figueres, UNFCCC (2015)

    “No matter if the science is all phoney, there are collateral environmental benefits…. climate change [provides] the greatest chance to bring about justice and equality in the world.” (Christine Stewart, former Canadian Environment Minister)

    “We’ve got to ride the global-warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” (Timothy Wirth, U.S./UN functionary, former elected Democrat Senator)

    “A global climate treaty must be implemented even if there is no scientific evidence to back the greenhouse effect.” (Richard Benedik, former U.S./UN bureaucrat)

    120

    • #
      Manfred

      Thank you Imwd #23.

      Altruism and rampant eco-marxism?
      Whatever. The kollective appear to have relinquished the smoke and mirrors. They either feel institutionally unassailable or truly desperate. I am inclined toward the latter.

      80

      • #
        lmwd

        “Institutionally unassailable or truly desperate”

        You know Manfred, I’ve been pondering on this most of the day, so thank you.

        I think the likes of Figueres fall into the first category. So surrounded by like minded people, they’ve let the guard down and they don’t seek to hide their real purpose any longer. They’re dropping the pre-tense that this is about climate. On the likes of Jeff Sparrow, I think it’s the latter. How else to explain why he neglected to tell his audience about his other publications and will not let Figueres’ words be printed in black or white for his audience to consider, before they respond. Even a comment mentioning his other writings gets censored. So clearly he’s not a very honest person if he needs to hide he’s a Marxist. He mustn’t be very confident that the people on that site would also be sympathetic to his real beliefs.

        The purpose behind his article was all about revving up the mob and letting them take a whack at Newman, in all their ignorance.

        50

        • #
          Ceetee

          I have this theory that people who work in the public service or live off the public purse for too long become institutionalised. They rarely adapt to the private sector after that. Too much accountability.

          00

    • #
      GMac

      “We’ve got to ride the global-warming issue. Even if the theory of global warming is wrong, we will be doing the right thing in terms of economic policy and environmental policy.” (Timothy Wirth, U.S./UN functionary, former elected Democrat Senator) because we know that the US Federal Reserve System is busted and the planet is awash with worthless US currency so we need to replace it with something slightly less worthless in co2 and then we can tax the entire population of the planet for zillions.

      40

  • #
    Brunswick_Greenie

    Hot spot.

    https://iopscience.iop.org/1748-9326/10/5/054007/article?v_showaffiliations=yes

    Why don’t you write up a response to Env. Res. Letters, as you will inevitably deny the paper. Or are you too busy working on the notch?

    :)

    114

    • #

      Thanks! Sherwood is priceless for entertainment value. He shows how desperate they are. 28 million radiosondes disagree with the fingerprint they predicted. This new paper apparently “updates” sherwood 2008 — one of the most pathetic efforts yet in modern science.

      They are using “wind” to measure the “temp” because the temperature-sensors keep getting the wrong answer. Then they homogenize as well…

      In Sherwood 2008 they changed the standard color scale so that a zero celcius trend looked “orange-red”. It was the ol graphic designer trick to hide the “flatness” that was supposed to be red hot warming.

      Missing hot spot found when color scales are altered.

      So, you’re still too coward to name yourself? You must know this is junk science.

      252

      • #
        Just-A-Guy

        Jo,

        Zero degree temp trend is shown in orange-red!!

        ROTFLMAO!!

        And here I thought Mike’s Nature Trick was as phoney as it gets.

        Abe

        110

      • #
        Yonniestone

        Are those the actual graphs or have they been pixelated for some reason?

        This appears to me the impressionist style of science graphs, how ironic.

        40

        • #

          They’re not pixelated. That’s the granularity of the data. Even after homogenization at the fudge factory.

          More recently, Sherwood has taken to Kriging (PDF) to in-fill data for the very few stations that he uses. in-filling wind direction and strength as well as temperatures. He then treats the fabricated numbers as though they were physical data. Yet it’s all come out of a model. (or ten)

          51

          • #

            Forgot to include a choice quote:

            Missing observations are imputed by Kriging ε (in space and time) and evaluating the other terms at the missing times, after which the model is refitted, until convergence. Regression of data onto the above equation ensures that variations in the data will be interpreted either as natural variability, forced trends or artefacts depending on which they most closely resemble.

            30

          • #
            Yonniestone

            I still can’t believe this guy is a Professor let alone a “scientist?” and present this in all seriousness!

            The fact that Brunswick_Greenie even used it as evidence supporting their cause is even more unbelievable.

            62

    • #
      Richard

      The most amusing thing is the IPCC’s own data no less doesn’t even support their predictions for climate sensitivity of around 3C so even if the hotspot exists (it doesn’t) it’s still irrelevant

      The IPCC tell us that doubling atmospheric CO2 will give us 3.7W/sq.m of warming. The IPCC also say that the atmospheric greenhouse from all sources of 333W/sq.m is enough to increase the surface temperature of the planet by 33C above its blackbody radiation temperature of -18C giving us a relationship of 0.1C per 1W/sq.m. Hence the atmospheric CO2 radiative forcing from a doubling of CO2 should produce around 0.37C (and feedbacks apparently are meant to triple the CO2 forcing so that’s a total of, what, just over 1C?).

      Isn’t it amazing that the IPCC’s own figures do not even support their computer-generated propositions?

      12

      • #
        Graeme No.3

        The other amusing? thing is that they believe in back radiation warming the oceans.

        The whole radiation theory ignores the First Law of Thermodynamics and relies on a sort of perpetual motion machine. Would indicate that there is a sorry lack of understanding of science by Climate “scientists”.

        12

    • #
      Richard

      The most amusing thing is the IPCC’s own data no less doesn’t even support their predictions for climate sensitivity of around 3C so even if the hotspot exists (it doesn’t) it’s still irrelevant

      The IPCC tell us that doubling atmospheric CO2 will give us 3.7W/sq.m of warming. The IPCC also say that the atmospheric greenhouse from all sources of 333W/sq.m is enough to increase the surface temperature of the planet by 33C above its blackbody radiation temperature of -18C giving us a relationship of 0.1C per 1W/sq.m. Hence the atmospheric CO2 radiative forcing from a doubling of CO2 should produce around 0.37C (and feedbacks apparently are meant to triple the CO2 forcing so that’s a total of, what, just over 1C?).

      Isn’t it amazing that the IPCC’s own figures do not even support their computer-generated propositions?

      00

  • #
    pat

    lmwd -

    as with the Climategate emails, the CAGW crowd don’t go to the source and actually do the necessary reading & critical thinking. they depend on someone like Jeff Sparrow (former student activist and member of the Trotskyist group, the International Socialist Organisation, Wikipedia) to tell them what to think, as ingenuous (disingenuous?)in the comments makes clear:

    - ingenuous: stupendus, it would help some of us understand what you are talking about if you could supply a reference or a quote.
    The only reference I can find to Christina Figueres in this area is a reply to a journalist asking what she thought of Maurice Newman’s comments. She answered that she likes humour and Newman is free to make jokes. -

    perhaps Jo could find a permanent spot at the top of her homepage for the Figueres’ quote which the MSM hasn’t seen fit to report to the public.

    as with good CAGW billionaires – Bloomberg, Steyer etc – there are good NWO-ists:

    Noam Chomsky on the New World Order (Part 1) – YouTube

    Noam Chomsky: “The Emerging New World Order, its roots

    Chomsky – On the “New World Order” and the Origins of His Scepticism

    Alternet: 7 Brilliant Insights from Noam Chomsky on American Empire …
    One of the nation’s greatest thinkers explains the New World Order. …

    Democracy Now: Noam Chomsky: Globalization and the New World Order

    btw funny how Jeff Sparrow was a Trotskyist, like most of the rightwing Neocons in the US! lol.

    21

    • #
      lmwd

      Thanks Pat, if Sparrow is essentially a Marxist, as his wiki page says, then of course he has no problem with Figueres’ ambitions. But interesting that he will not allow her words to be put up in black and white. Nor does he advertise the fact that he is also the author of Communism: A love story. His article is all about setting off the mob to attack Newman.

      30

  • #
    pat

    Rereke Whakaaro – The Venice Biennale:

    AUDIO: 11 May: ABC Books & Arts: All the World’s Futures: we review the 56th Venice Biennale
    The politics are coming through load and clear at this year’s biennale titled “All the World’s Futures”, including in Fiona Hall’s work housed in the newly built Australian pavilion.
    Presenter: Michael Cathcart
    Julie Ewington, Arts reviewer
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/booksandarts/56th-venice-biennale-review/6459402

    Cathcart & Ewington discussing readings of Karl Marx’s “Das Kapital” at the Biennale, paraphrasing:

    Ewington: …some American visitors don’t like it much which is interesting…
    Cathcart: readings from the Bible of Communism, giggle
    Ewington: allows us to consider justice, resources blah blah
    Cathcart: and to speak seriously about it. it’s not just a mischievous joke. Capitalism has become dysfunctional , & here is one of the great analyses of capitalism, so it ought to be in the mix.

    for Ewington, the Biennale this year is just fabulous.

    meanwhile, from Guardian sister paper, The Observer:

    10 May: UK Observer: Laura Cumming: 56th Venice Biennale review – more of a glum trudge than an exhilarating adventure
    There’s an awful lot of fretting about the state of the world in the Biennale’s 88 national pavilions, but little power, wit or bravado
    Down the canal, however, Julien is putting on a different front altogether in the official Giardini, staging a live reading of Das Kapital in its entirety in the Biennale’s new spoken-word venue, Arena. No doubt he can live with the preposterous contradictions involved. But the double act is emblematic of this 56th edition of the world’s grandest art event, which is nothing if not explicitly critical of capitalism, consumerism and filthy lucre while relying upon them all for its very lifeblood…
    Coal sacks dangle like trade union banners from the walls to put us in mind of the decline in mining…
    In the British pavilion, Sarah Lucas stands out purely by virtue of having no political content whatsoever…
    PHOTO: Actor Cate Blanchett looks at driftwood sculptures by Fiona Hall on display at the Australian pavilion.
    While Julien’s actors are reciting Marx in the Arena space to an audience of practically no one, Hall is one of the few artists here to respond to the real and urgent political present instead of simply rehearsing the usual art-scene rhetoric. A map of the southern Mediterranean is strewn with tenderly formed figures representing the migrants who drowned between Africa and Italy last week; a miniature requiem…
    These artists are worried about the state of the world, and their own nations, and many of them don’t care if what they produce is on the level of agitprop. If I saw one endangered plant species I saw 10…
    There are trashed flags and ticking clocks everywhere, along with a whole variety of shop installations – capitalism in microcosm. Which is slightly farcical, since so many of the pavilions have become shops themselves now, the shows paid for by the artists’ galleries and all of the work up for sale…
    But I can’t recall a Biennale with so little visual power, originality, wit or bravado. It feels more like a glum trudge than the usual exhilarating adventure…
    http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2015/may/10/venice-biennale-2015-review-56th-sarah-lucas-xu-bing-chiharu-shiota

    to be fair, Cumming does single out the Australian exhibit as one of her Top 5.

    on ABC’s Books & Arts at one point, Fiona Hall is talking about aboriginal remote communities, & slips up by saying “lifestyle”. she catches herself immediately & says she didn’t mean to say “lifestyle” because that’s a word the Prime Minister used and it’s offensive…so she changes it to “livelihoods”!

    shut down the ABC.

    31

    • #
      Just-A-Guy

      pat,

      A comment on capitalism has become dysfunctional.

      Capitalism is often equated directly or by implication to globalism.

      Capitalism works so well because of the concept of competition in a market ruled by supply and demand. As long as there is competition, the price of goods and services will remain low, meaning ‘at their natural price level’.

      Globalism seeks to undermine competition by concentrating supply in the hands and under the control of the few or the one.

      The problem with capitalism isn’t capitalism per-se. The problem is that in the name of capitalism and ‘free-markets’, globalism in effect destroys the fundamental nature of capitalism, competition.

      So whenever you see someone complaining about the evils of capitalism, know that what they are refferring to is the globalist ideal of supply-side control of a resource by way of the falsely named, anti-capitalist meme of ‘free-trade’.

      Abe

      50

      • #
        GMac

        Capitalism can be a bit of an abstract word,does it mean “free-market”or is it monopoly,one thing that we do know is that “corporate capitalism”and “state capitalism” are very similar in their desires,both are anti free-market,both want absolute control of the market for finance and labour.

        20

        • #
          Just-A-Guy

          GMac,

          When one looks behind the rhetoric and examines the substance of what people like Figueres are actually saying, one sees a clear desire by them to tread the road to “state capitalism”. Case in point:

          Quoted by Andrew McRae yesterday:

          I don’t know one private sector company that makes an investment without making profit. That is their terms of reference. And that is actually a very powerful motivation. So instead of condemning them, let us put in the kinds of frameworks and the kinds of structures that are necessary to attract the power of private sector investment. Because we want them to develop the buildings that produce energy. We want them to develop the buildings that produce food. We want them to develop the kinds of roads that going to recharge cars. That’s the private sector that is going to do it. But they need to have a certain predictability and a certain rate of return.
          - Christiana Figueres, April 18, 2013.

          My bolding in the Figueres quote.

          ‘Frameworks’ and ‘structures’ are just UN speak for laws, rules, and regulations. When the frameworks and structures are refered to in a general sense, the proper term in UN speak is ‘governance’, but we all know they mean ‘Government’.

          Abe

          20

          • #
            Just-A-Guy

            As an after-thought and to be clear in my statements. When I said ‘tread the road’ I meant just that. This road has long ago been paved in the UN Agenda for the 21st Century.

            Abe

            10

        • #
          Dariusz

          “Capitalism can be a bit of an abstract word”
          It is quite amazing how in the capitalist west most people are indifferent about the word “capitalism” . And yet when I was forced to study “das kapital”capitalism was elevated to a supreme evil from which communism hatred was drawn. This cavalier attitude betrays lack of understanding of the enemy and people are often astonished that the left uses this word to unite against other things like freedom, free enterprise, globalisation. The right is quite often lost trying to understand why such a word would stir such passion with the left. And yet I grew up in the relentless hatred of capitalism. Capitalism was drugs, murder, decay, materialism, imperialism, colonialism, slavery, war, aggression, greed, lack of compassion, inhumanity, Nixon, Vietnam war, poverty in the east (not just the west), failure of crops in the Soviet Union, pornography, Cold War, nuclear war.
          Then I discovered that capitalism was none of the above as this system could only flourish under an economic freedom. Unfortunately the economic freedom can be suppressed quite easily and has ceased to exist ever since Roosevelt and Hoover before him discovered state intervention.
          What we have now is a rump of what people want to call capitalism. They use this world as a scapegoat for the ills of the world. It is not socialism or even communism that is evil and really should be equated with death and totaliarism. These words are not as bad as the greed that is synonymous with capitalism. Why? I think because people can relate to greed and hence to guilt which far more common than say death which is far more extreme and obviously alien to an average person.

          30

          • #
            Ceetee

            Very interesting Dariusz. If I read you correctly you grew up behind the Iron Curtain. If so you really could teach some of the clowns in this part of the world a thing or two. Problem is they wouldn’t listen, their intellectual capital is too deeply invested in their chosen bottom line. If it ever became blindingly obvious that they were irrefutably wrong they would simply dissolve into obscurity but remain ready like sleepers for some opportunity to start barking at us again. I recently read a book about the indescribable heartbreak that many in the GDR went through when they discovered many trusted confidants were actually state informants. People like Figueres would take us back to that. This issue (AGW) is the perfect Trojan Horse to that end. I simply don’t understand people like that, what motivates them?

            00

    • #
      Rereke Whakaaro

      Thankyou Pat.

      10

  • #
    TdeF

    Extraordinary article in the Australian this morning which shows how groupthink ignores the obvious. “Antarctica bases battle record ice”. So some bases may have to be closed as they cannot be supplied.

    There is more ice, it is much thicker, it is happening faster and earlier.

    “Professor Tony Worby Chief Executive of the Climate and Ecosystems CRC” said expanding Antarctic sea ice had not been expected initially with Climate Change but was now better understood”.

    So his explanation..

    Sea ice was expanding due to changed wind patterns driven by ozone depletion, greenhouse gas.. and natural variability. (Certainly not temperature)

    However when sea ice melts as in the Arctic, it is unequivocal proof of rapid man made global warming and certainly not natural variability.

    And of course the world is really warming even if the thermometers refuse to show it. That’s climate change for you. Natural variability is only pulled out of the that to explain the lack of warming and increased sea ice. Everything is your fault and you should pay. What does Chief Executive mean?

    60

    • #
      Rick Will

      Over the last decade Antarctic has lost ice at the rate of 92 billion tonnes annually – according to NASA space mission:
      http://www.climatenewsnetwork.net/scientists-weigh-up-new-evidence-on-antarctic-ice-melt/
      Quote
      “And while the scientists can’t yet say for certain that human-made climate change is the main cause, they warn that the ice loss has the potential to have serious impacts on sea level rise.”
      It does annoy me when I see wishy-washy statements like this – THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED – get that clear. If Antactic ice melting is a bad thing then it is certainly caused by man made CO2 – the devel of the 21st century.

      It is this massive volume of ice cooling the water that is increasing the sea ice – surely you know this.

      I have to admit that the incredible accuracy of satellites able to determine an annual loss of the ice mass of 0.00035% is mind boggling and amazing science. If I was sceptical, which I am, I believe that result could be fudged either way.

      Same thing is happening with Greenland ice mass – or was up till this year. The cold water off Greenland is slowing the North Atlantic circulation causing some places to be colder and others hotter than “normal”. This year is already shaping up to be a little different for Greenland:
      http://www.dmi.dk/uploads/tx_dmidatastore/webservice/e/n/i/b/m/Melt_combine.png
      Following the little blue line!
      http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/meant80n.uk.php
      Follow the little red line.

      20

      • #
        TdeF

        The worry with all this and Antarctic ice is kms thick, is that they allegedly understand everything but can predict nothing. The wisdom is all in hindsight and when there is no explanation, we get Natural Variability? What is that?

        How does melted ice water produce sea ice anyway? If it was cold enough to form ice, why did it melt? There may be warming in areas of Antarctica from volcanoes which produce regional melting which then turns into sea ice, but to blame Climate Change, the Ozone layer, Natural variability and Greenhouse gases and ultimately the wind, is to make anyone think they really have no idea.

        It all sounds like “The Castle”. Dennis Denuto: In summing up, it’s the constitution, it’s Mabo, it’s justice, it’s law, it’s the vibe, and…no that’s it…it’s the vibe. I rest my case. Global Warming then.

        41

      • #
        TdeF

        “The incredible accuracy of satellites able to determine an annual loss of the ice mass of 0.00035% is mind boggling and amazing science”.

        Not really. The satellite can measure the top position quite accurately. That’s all. The number is only small because in say 4km of thickness, this is a variation of (3.5*10-6)*(4*10^6) = 14mm. Run for your lives!

        However it does not measure density, holes, what is going on underneath or temperature below the surface. What about compression?

        What we do know though is that it is all so cold, the alleged massive global warming of 0.8C in a century would not budge it even if this was true in Antarctica. Winter averages are closer to -50C and summer -25C. 1C would not melt Antarctica. The whole Southern Hemisphere is far colder than the North and in the Arctic summer temperatures can reach 25C, which is why all the animals head North in summer and most of Canada and Siberia is free of ice. No such luck with Antarctica.

        As Prof Plimer points out though is that ice in the Arctic and Antarctic are counter cyclic. A maximum in one is a minimum in the other. Of course scientists cannot explain this. Natural Variation I guess. Perhaps the Ozone hole in the South?

        31

        • #
          Rick Will

          The satellites are using changes in gravity to determine the mass change. That is how the 92 billion tonnes was arrived at – the GRACE mission.

          The last set of actual radar thickness measurements increased the ice volume by 4.5% over the original data set done a few years earlier. So we have radar thickness measurements giving accuracy of 4.5% while the gravity measurements have to be way better than 0.00035% to arrive at the 92 billion tonnes.

          I could not hold a straight face and make claims about the Antarctic being crisis with a ice mass loss of 0.00035% having some appreciation of error analysis. The real scientific figure is more like 92 billion tonnes give or take 10,000 billion tonnes. If you saw numbers like this you would just laugh.

          40

          • #
            TdeF

            Yes, it sounds like a lot 92 billion tons. Scary.

            However looking at it another way, Antarctica is 14,000,000 km2 in area. To a depth of only 1 metre that is 14,000,000,000,000 m3 or 14,000,000,000,000 tons. 14,000 billion tons!
            Then by the miracle of fractions the top 92/14,000 of 1000mm is only 6.5mm, a quarter of an inch. Surely given the nature of the surface, this is an average and close to the limit of error for a mobile surface?

            If it was done with gravity somehow, any measurement to this accuracy would be an entirely new and remarkable technology, separating land from km of ice to unbelievable accuracy. No, it is likely distance measurement like ocean levels and a simple calculation.

            Either way it shows how people will try to frighten with crazy numbers out of physical context. That alone shows intent and discredits what is claimed. The sky is not falling.

            30

            • #
              TdeF

              Looking at GRACE, they are achieving 2cm resolution to augment altimetry and in the case of oceans, improve the data. However for stationary ice, it hardly matters. In effect, I can only see that they in effect get surface level variations at near the resolution. The thickness of the ice is not in itself measurable. Possibly this 92 billion tons is just to get attention for the project. As such it is an incredibly small amount of ice in relation to what is there, which means on average it is not changing. Like the Global temperature.

              20

  • #

    “Climate change isn’t happening; it’s happening but it’s not caused by humans; it’s happening and it’s caused by humans but we should just adapt to it.” – Jeff Sparrow

    I’ve never heard these claims all attributed to the same people before. The first of these, nobody claims. The second is a simplification of “it’s happening but we’re not sure it’s primarily caused by humans”. “We should just adapt to it” is a simplification of “we’re not sure if the benefits of trying to stop global warming outweigh the costs”.

    In short, Jeff Sparrow is a liar. This article is too kind to him.

    20

    • #
      Safetyguy66

      That’s Captain Jeff Sparrow….

      You will always remember this as the day he almost made sense.

      30

  • #
    Steve

    I’m quite sure that if Labor (or the Labor-Greens) were still in power right now, there would be literal crucifixions of ‘climate deniers’ going on at the Capital Hill mound today. I shudder to think what might happen to Mr Newman in 2016 if the Libs lose power; I believe Tim Flannery would be the presiding Priest at that particular martyring, after Newman fails to recant his heresy of course. If the USA finally falls to this new pseudo-religion, then Australia will find it progressively harder to escape from this beast. We need more Liberal politicians to start talking their mind and ‘shirt front’ (LOL) this assault instead of trying to avoid it.

    10

  • #
    Brunswick_Greenie

    Oh yes of course, deny, deny, deny. Blame it on “sneaky” color scales.

    You seem to trust satellite measurements. Two separate lines of evidence using radio occultation, showing similar results,

    http://www.atmos-meas-tech.net/4/1965/2011/amt-4-1965-2011.pdf
    http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs00382-013-2012-5

    Note, the sneaky color scale in the second reference.

    If you wrote up your thoughts for Sherwood’s paper, you would have an article in the peer-reviewed literature. And seeing as you will deny the other two, you could do the same for them too. Soon you may have an h-index approaching Lomborg’s, and can join the gravy train.

    Nothin’ to do with courage. I have a job and just come here for light entertainment, when feeling bored.

    14

    • #

      As I’ve said a hundred times satellites are pathetic for finding the hot spot. Their vertical resolution is too poor. Radiosondes are much better.

      As for “deny deny deny”. It’s all projection eh? You deny 28 million weather balloons. We skeptics just go with the evidence.

      If you were proud of what you write you’d put your name to it.

      52

    • #
      Andrew McRae

      I’m not sure how the first linked paper is relevant. You do know the difference between TLS and TLT, don’t you? So establishing similarity of RO and AMSU measurements in TLS doesn’t necessarily imply they will be the same for TLT.

      Just from the abstract of the second paper it sounds much more directly relevant to the AGW hypothesis, but the tricky part here is finding a quantitative definition of a “tropical tropospheric hotspot”. It’s great to have the numbers, but without a quantitative test for a hotspot we’re all still left interpreting pretty pictures according to our own biases.

      00

  • #
    pat

    should have added that Fiona Hall didn’t forget to bring up “global climate change” “global warming” and “incendiary” when speaking with Cathcart about the Australian outback.

    on the eve of the Budget, ABC also broadcast the following:

    11 May: ABC Big Ideas: Fair taxation and health
    Guests:
    Dr Tessa Boyd-Caine, Deputy CEO, Director, Sector and Stakeholder Engagement, ACOSS
    Professor Ron Labonte, University of Ottawa
    Catherine King, (Labor) Shadow Health Minister
    Kate Carnell, CEO, Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry
    Professor Fran Baum, Director, Southgate Institute for Health, Society and Equity, at Flinders University
    Further information:
    (HOMEPAGE, NO INFO) Southgate Institute Flinders University
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/bigideas/

    paraphrasing Professor Fran Baum: if the point of taxation is to provide good health, education, roads, infrastructure, & tax externalities such as CARBON TAXES, it can be very helpful, taxes can be really useful, and people would think, YEAH, THAT’S A GOOD THING GOVT IS DOING. they’re taking money, but but they’re re-investing it in things that benefit my kids, benefit my elderly parents…etc

    note there was no Govt representative.
    Catherine King, Labor’s Shadow Health Minister endlessly informed the audience about what great economic managers Labor were under Rudd & Gillard, and even Whitlam got a mention. any mention of the current Govt, mostly by King, was to say it was following/or not following Labor policy.

    so what was this event at Flinders University which ABC did not tell its listeners about?

    Flinders Uni: You are invited to the launch of the NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence on Social Determinants of Health Equity: Policy research on the social determinants of health equity
    By The Hon Julia Gillard
    To be held on Friday, 24 April 2015…
    Confirmed speakers: Labonte, Carnell, Baum etc.
    Panel discussion hosted by Paul Barclay, ABC Radio National Big Ideas.
    http://www.flinders.edu.au/medicine/fms/sites/southgate/Invitation%20Flyer_combined%20events_MACOV2.pdf

    shut down the ABC.

    21

  • #
    pat

    calling TonyfromOz.

    just a “trend”, yet “leap-frogging” should mean overtaking, but heck it’s a good story:

    12 May: ABC: How China’s energy is becoming more green than black
    John A. Mathews and Hao Tan
    (John A. Mathews is Professor of Strategy at Macquarie Graduate School of Management in Sydney. Hao Tan is Senior Lecturer at Newcastle Business School, University of Newcastle, Australia)
    Far from playing catch up, China is ***leap-frogging the technology that drove the Industrial Revolution in the West and channelling investment into clean energy.
    CHINA GENERATES most of its electricity by burning fossil fuels, just as every rising economic power has done since the Industrial Revolution. But to focus on this single fact risks overlooking a notable ***trend…
    Remarkably, nuclear energy played only a small role in this change. Electricity generated by strictly green sources — water, wind, and solar — increased by 20 per cent, with the most dramatic growth occurring in solar power generation, which rose a staggering 175 per cent. Solar power also surpassed nuclear in terms of new energy produced, providing an extra 17,430 gigawatt-hours last year, compared to 14,700 gigawatt-hours from nuclear sources. And, for the third consecutive year, China generated more electricity from wind than from nuclear energy. Given this, the argument that China will be dependent on nuclear power plants for non-carbon sources of electricity appears to have little merit…
    The second area in which the green trend has become apparent is China’s total electricity-generating capacity. The country’s power system is now the world’s largest, capable of producing 1,360 gigawatts, compared to the United States’ 1,000 gigawatts.
    Direct comparisons of different power sources are difficult, because the use of wind, solar, nuclear, and fossil-fuel plants varies according to the time of day…
    Last year was the second in a row in which China added more generating ***capacity from non-fossil-fuel sources than from fossil-fuel sources. China increased its ability to generate electricity from fossil fuels by 45 gigawatts, to reach a total of 916 gigawatts. At the same time, it increased its capacity to produce electricity from non-fossil-fuel sources by 56 gigawatts, achieving a total of 444 gigawatts. Wind, water, and solar plants added 51 gigawatts of generating capacity.
    As a result, wind, water, and solar power accounts for 31 per cent of China’s total electricity-generation capacity, up from 21 per cent in 2007, while nuclear power accounts for another 2 per cent…
    China’s power system remains heavily based on coal, and much more will be burned ***before the system can accurately be described as more green than black. But the direction of change is ***clear…
    http://www.abc.net.au/environment/articles/2015/05/12/4233710.htm

    a dose of reality, ABC/writers:

    11 May: NDTV: Reuters: China Becomes World’s Top Crude Buyer
    China overtook the United States as the world’s top importer of crude oil for the first time in April, and its purchases are expected to remain strong despite a slowing economy, with far-reaching consequences for global oil and commodities markets.
    The soaring imports came as a surprise as growth in the world’s second-largest economy was sputtering and its oil demand was expected to ease…
    China’s crude oil imports hit a record of almost 7.4 million barrels a day (bpd) last month, putting it ahead of the United States’ estimated imports of 7.2 million bpd for April, Reuters data show…
    ***Overtaking the United States means China is the top user of almost all commodities, including coal, iron ore and most metals, with far-reaching implications for markets which continue to shift from West to East…
    http://profit.ndtv.com/news/industries/article-china-becomes-worlds-top-crude-buyer-762217

    10

    • #
      manalive

      Electricity generated by strictly green sources — water, wind, and solar — increased by 20 per cent ….etc.

      Half-truth, China has the largest hydro generation in the world, the Three Gorges Dam.
      Eyesight test, find solar and wind : Net electricity generation by fuel projection (U.S. Energy Information Administration).

      30

    • #

      The only reason that China seems to be being green in its power generation is because of one thing.

      Hydro Power.

      They are still constructing new tech coal fired power hand over fist.

      The reason they seem to be green is that a huge amount of Hydro finally came on stream in the last year, hydro that has been many years in the construction.

      True, their green source of generation is now up beyond 28%, but almost 26% of that is hydro alone. Wind currently delivers around 2%, and solar around, well, basically zero really, at 0.0 something or other percent.

      Be aware also that there is a shirtload of hydro still to come on stream, and even more in the planning, so while coal fired power quite literally powers ahead, Hydro is booming, and keep in mind that Hydro will last considerably longer than nearly any other form of power generation.

      The ONLY reason the whole of World renewable percentage is as high as it is, is because of only one thing, China Hydro.

      Note also the emphasis on Nameplate, (referred to as Capacity in pat’s text) and not on actual delivered power, and that’s something I have noticed recently in virtually everything I read. It’s just Nameplate Nameplate Nameplate. That makes Wind look better because if they quoted actual delivery of power, people might actually begin to ask some questions. Nameplate is more than three times greater than actual delivery, because of the Capacity Factor of only 30%.

      Oh, and one little snippet about Three Gorges.

      Last year, 2014, This immense Hydro Plant broke the record for largest power delivery from the one plant for the one whole of year.

      It delivered 98.8TWh of power to China’s grid, and for some perspective on how much that really is, well, it’s around HALF of the total power generation for the WHOLE of Australia from EVERY power plant in the Country.

      Here’s the link to that article, and note how they just cannot help themselves. They still have to snipe away it it for it’s supposed environmental impact. That one hydro plant alone pulled tens of millions of people out of the most abject poverty, has stopped down river floods which, over the years have killed millions, and caused the surrounding area to become populated by literally millions of people.

      Tony.

      60

      • #
        Rollo

        The ONLY reason the whole of World renewable percentage is as high as it is, is because of only one thing, China Hydro.

        Thanks for a great post once again Tony. Do you have any figures at your fingertips showing the world’s renewable percentages with and without hydro? Given the green’s hatred of obstucting Gaia’s circulatory system I don’t think that hydro should be included in THEIR renewable percentage figures, even though hydro makes infinitely more sense than wind or solar by any normal person’s reckoning.

        10

        • #

          For some recent information, see RENEWABLES 2014 GLOBAL STATUS REPORT, and this is a 216 page pdf document.

          Now, scroll down to the bottom of page 25 and look at Figure 3, and the information this is based on is at End Note 39 on Page 145.

          While the caption underneath the Figure 3 mentions ….. based on capacity, this is in fact generation, in other words, power actually being delivered.

          You can see that the total for all Renewables is 22.1%, and in the expansion to the right of the diagram, it shows the makeup of that, and Hydro makes up 16.4% (almost three quarters of all renewables)

          Wind delivers 2.9%, Solar PV 0.7%, and Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) is put in with Geothermal and Ocean, and that in total is 0.4%.

          So overall the two most favoured renewables total in at around 3.8% of generated power.

          And how many Trillions have been spent on Wind and Solar?

          And everywhere Green, you read how CSP is the golden child to replace coal fired power. Oh, dream on!

          Tony.

          20

    • #

      I know that with a more recent Thread running that not many people will come back and read this, but I’m working on something and realised just how disingenuous the ABC really must be with the above article which pat mentioned, where he wrote this:

      And, for the third consecutive year, China generated more electricity from wind than from nuclear energy.

      That’s true of course, but what the ABC failed to mention is this.

      They will refer to actual generated power only when it’s convenient, while using Nameplate to show something else, like how much wind there might be in total Nameplate, but rarely will they correlate the two of them together to differentiate how poorly wind really performs.

      When it comes to delivered power, Wind does indeed generate more power than the currently operational Nuclear power plants.

      However, when it comes to Nameplate, Wind power has a higher Nameplate by a factor of 5.2. Wind power in China is currently delivering its power at a Capacity Factor of only 21%.

      At the start Nuclear power plants run at a (relatively) low Capacity Factor, sometimes down around 60%, still more than double that for Wind, but once they are operating in a stable manner, as are all those Nuclear power plants in the U.S. especially, they operate at an average Capacity Factor around 92%, and in fact the U.S. regularly operates all its Nukes at around 93 to 95%.

      China has a lot of Nuclear power still yet to come on line.

      It’s a regular ABC meme to build up only those two renewables in current favour, wind and solar, to somehow show that they are making some sort of impact, and both of those can be proved to be of such minor consequence as to be unable to do what is claimed of them, to ultimately replace coal fired power, something they will never do.

      Tony.

      30

  • #
    GMac

    To know in what real direction the Green/UN movement is going is this to consider- Christians believe and Prophets have taught that at the next advent of Christ the Earth will be changed and revert back to its paradisiacal glory as at the time of the Garden of Eden,so my question to them is why don’t they push for the advent of Christ,after all the world is going to become the perfect utopia,no sickness and death as we know it will change plus the Earth will grow foods without input from man and as a final garland their will be no meat eating all animals and humans will live in perfect felicity.
    What more could they want,so why aren’t they teaching about Christ and His Second Coming?

    00

    • #
      el gordo

      Its a religion of a different faith, let’s call it Gaia, aiming to save the planet for their grandchildren. Its millenarianism, with high priests and their mouth pieces on a virtuous cause, which on this occasion has nothing to do with biblical fantasy.

      10

  • #
    pat

    12 May: ABC: Bureau of Meteorology officially declares a major El Nino; predicts drier, hotter conditions
    Updated 6 minutes ago
    by Jake Sturmer and Caitlyn Gribbin
    The Bureau of Meteorology has officially declared a major El Nino event, which is likely to lead to prolonged drier, hotter conditions across much of eastern Australia…
    The Bureau said it had a “near miss” with declaring an event last year, with some indications showing sea surface temperatures were at El Nino levels.
    But these signs did not all occur at once.
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-12/el-nino-officially-declared-drier-hotter-conditions-predicted/6463966

    no-one at ABC appears to want to own the following!

    12 May: ABC: Wild weather set to hit Victoria, with blizzards, snow and hail forecast
    Attributed to ABC/AAP at bottom of page
    Updated 13 minutes ago
    Victoria is bracing for wild winds across the state, blizzards in alpine areas and possible flooding in Melbourne.
    The Bureau of Meteorology (BOM) has issued a severe weather warning for damaging winds and blizzards for people in the West and South Gippsland and East Gippsland forecast districts…
    Snow has been forecast to fall below 600 metres, over much of the Dandenong Ranges, the Yarra Ranges and hills around Melbourne…
    Recent rain has brought the eastern portion of the catchment to near-saturation point – and up to 50 millimetres of rain could fall in parts of the Melbourne area by Wednesday night.
    Minor flooding is expected from late Tuesday.
    Mr Dickson said the cold weather would persist until the weekend…
    Victoria’s alpine areas already received snowfalls last week, almost a month before the season is due to open, with Falls Creek and Mt Hotham reporting around 10-15cm for the week..
    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-05-12/wild-weather-set-to-hit-victoria/6462366

    31

    • #
      Bulldust

      Queue every heat wave and hot day for the rest of the year will be due to “climate change.” It will be worse than we thought.

      30

    • #
      BruceC

      As usual Pat, the ABC has hyped-up the official BoM Report (notice how they don’t hyper-link to it), also notice their part headline: “which is likely to lead to prolonged drier, hotter conditions across much of eastern Australia“. If you notice my bolding below, the BoM suggests that May through July, much of Australia will be wetter than average.

      The tropical Pacific is in the early stages of El Niño. Based upon model outlooks and current observations, the Bureau’s ENSO Tracker has been raised to El Niño status.

      El Niño–Southern Oscillation (ENSO) indicators have shown a steady trend towards El Niño levels since the start of the year. Sea surface temperatures in the tropical Pacific Ocean have exceeded El Niño thresholds for the past month, supported by warmer-than-average waters below the surface. Trade winds have remained consistently weaker than average since the start of the year, cloudiness at the Date Line has increased and the Southern Oscillation Index (SOI) has remained negative for several months. These indicators suggest the tropical Pacific Ocean and atmosphere have started to couple and reinforce each other, indicating El Niño is likely to persist in the coming months.

      International climate models surveyed by the Bureau indicate that tropical Pacific Ocean temperatures are likely to remain above El Niño thresholds through the coming southern winter and at least into spring.

      El Niño is often associated with below-average winter and spring rainfall over eastern Australia, and above-average daytime temperatures over the southern half of the country. However, the current May to July outlook suggests much of Australia is likely to be wetter than average. This is because a warmer-than-average Indian Ocean is dominating this outlook. El Niño is expected to become the dominant influence on Australian climate during the second half of the year.

      Nowhere in the above official report has the BoM declared a “major El Niño event”!

      40

  • #
    Tristan

    Q: Overall, what tends to provide better outcomes for a public, an authoritarian system of governance or a democratic one?
    A: Democratic.

    Q: Are the advantages of an authoritarian system a strict subset of the advantages of a democratic one?
    A: No.

    Q: Would the economic mobilisation required to drastically alter the state of a nation’s energy generation be easier under an authoritarian system?
    A: Conceivably.

    Q: If your answer to the above question was ‘Yes’, does that indicate a desire to instill a worldwide authoritarian system?
    A: No.
    Maurice Newman: Yes!

    15

    • #
      Just-A-Guy

      Tristan,

      You asked:

      Q: Would the economic mobilisation required to drastically alter the state of a nation’s energy generation be easier under an authoritarian system?
      A: Conceivably.

      Your answer is wrong. The correct answer is Yes. Under a dictatorship, what the ‘politburo’ says, goes. No ifs, ands, or buts. I’m surprised you’re unaware of this fact.

      You asked:

      Q: If your answer to the above question was ‘Yes’, does that indicate a desire to instill a worldwide authoritarian system?
      A: No.

      The answer is correct but the question is wrong. You refer here to the previous question about the intent of ‘one nation’ but now ask if that leads to the conclusion that ‘the whole world’ is on that path, if that is their intent.

      Straw man. Maurice Newman is referring to the intent, in Paris later this year, to impose by a legally binding treaty, the restructuring of the ‘worlds’ power generation infrastructure. He, Newman, does not come to his conclusion based on the intent of ‘one nation’. He’s basing his conclusion on the well-known and on-going world-wide program to conclude such a treaty.

      The negotiations leading up to this restructuring have been going on for years and the details are reported every day in the popular media. That you aren’t aware of this fact is embarasing, if you ask me.

      Abe

      60

  • #
    pat

    Christian Porter is the Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister and represents the electorate of Pearce in WA.
    He was previously a senior member of the WA State Government, serving in the portfolios of Attorney-General, Minister for Corrective Services and Treasurer…
    He holds a Bachelor of Economics, a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and a Bachelor of Laws from the University of WA, as well as a Master of Science (Political Theory) from the London School of Economics…

    he was a guest on ABC’s Q&A last nite & was interrupted by Palmer & Jones the first time he speaks:

    (IN-DEPTH DISCUSSION OF THE POINTS RAISED ABOUT UN CLIMATE CHIEF CHRISTIANA FIGUERES’ STATEMENTS IN MAURICE NEWMAN’S AUSTRALIAN ARTICLE??? lol.)

    11 May: ABC Q&A: Struggle Street on Budget Eve
    (first question) ROBERT WARD: My question is: so the political commentator Latika Burns(sic) described Joe Hockey as being sad, depressed and deflated. How does the budget affect the future of Joe Hockey’s career?
    UN CLIMATE HOAX
    Mike Phillips asked: Climate change is a hoax led by the United Nations so that it can end democracy and impose authoritarian rule, according to Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s chief business adviser Maurice Newman. Newman is not a scientist but a diehard climate change denier.
    Do the panel members’ believe that someone with views like Newman’s should be allowed anywhere within a mile of the Prime Minister?
    CLIVE PALMER: Well, I think, living in a democracy, it’s a matter for the Prime Minister’s judgment on who he associates and why he associates with various people and that may give you a reflection of what sort of Prime Minister he is and what he stands for. Of course, climate change is real. It’s right throughout the world. Whether we believe it’s fake or not, we have to comply with it because we are part of the international community and, you know, we’ve seen the – recently our party got the Government to introduce a Parliamentary inquiry to bring back an environmental trading scheme and the Climate Change Authority is doing that. And, of course, it’s a question of judgment. You don’t have advisers – normally your advisers in politics are people that tend to agree with you…

    CHRISTIAN PORTER: Look, I don’t share Mr Newman’s particular concerns but I would say that, you know, we’re a country where you have your views and you can speak them freely. I mean, there was a fellow not that long ago who believed that there should be a world government voted on a one vote one value basis by all Earthians. Now, he spent a bit of time in a Senate quite close to the PM so, you know, it takes all types.
    TONY JONES: Yes but he wasn’t advising the Prime Minister on business matters.
    CHRISTIAN PORTER: No, no, he was making fundamental decisions that affect us all in our nation through holding the balance of power in the Senate.
    CLIVE PALMER: God bless him.
    CHRISTIAN PORTER: And his views were kooky…

    NAKKIAH LUI: I’d just like to ask Maurice Newman if Elvis is actually dead or if he’s just gone home? Was the moon landing faked?
    CLIVE PALMER: He has left the building.
    NAKKIAH LUI: I mean, it’s an abuse of power. You have a man up there. He has a responsibility as the business adviser to Tony Abbott. I mean this is the business adviser to Tony Abbott making decision about our economy. No wonder Joe Hockey is, like, looking scared. But it’s an abuse. He has a responsibility to ***purport facts. This is an outright lie. It is a conspiracy theory that’s up there with playing Beyonce records backwards has Satanic verses. I mean it’s actually ridiculous and it’s quite embarrassing that he is saying this.
    CLIVE PALMER: That’s true, isn’t it?
    NAKKIAH LUI: I don’t know, I haven’t tried. I haven’t played a record in ages. But it’s embarrassing.
    NAKKIAH LUI: I don’t know, I haven’t tried. I haven’t played a record in ages. But it’s embarrassing.

    TONY JONES: Christian, was he joking? I mean, it is possible there’s a let out clause, here, that it was a bit of stand-up comedy or something?
    CHRISTIAN PORTER: Look, I think that some of the reporting of what he actually said was probably slightly hyperbolic, I must say. But, look, as I say, it’s not a view that I share but…
    TONY JONES: He did write it in an article though, didn’t he?
    CHRISTIAN PORTER: Yes, he did, but I think the secondary reporting made it sound a lot worse than it was, if I could put it that way.
    TONY JONES: How did you interpret it?
    CHRISTIAN PORTER: Well, I interpret it as a person who has a grave concern about the notion of a world government which some people advocate for.
    TONY JONES: You don’t agree though?
    CHRISTIAN PORTER: No. No.

    TONY JONES: Okay. Jennifer Hewett?
    JENNIFER HEWETT: Well, I’d say that Maurice Newman is very lucky in that he gives great solace to all Tony Abbott’s many critics when he makes comments like that and I don’t think it helps the Prime Minister, even if it may be unfairly interpreted.
    TONY JONES: Jason Clare?
    JASON CLARE: Well, Tony Abbott talks about absolute crap when he talks about climate change. This…
    TONY JONES: No, to be fair he…
    JASON CLARE: Well, he says “Climate change is absolute crap”. What Maurice Newman said is absolute crap and what frustrates the hell out of me is that we’re still having this debate about whether climate change is real or not. It’s real. We should be focusing on what we need to do about it.
    http://www.abc.net.au/tv/qanda/txt/s4212658.htm

    Nakkiah Lui is a young leader in the Australian Aboriginal community and has contributed to The Guardian…and has appeared on The Drum on ABC.

    Jason Clare is the shadow communications minister and represents the seat of Blaxland in Labor’s western Sydney heartland.

    Jennifer Hewett is now national affairs columnist for The Australian Financial Review… Previously she was national affairs writer for The Australian, and earlier had worked for the AFR and The Sydney Morning Herald. She also regularly appears as a commentator on TV and radio …
    She has a Bachelors degree from the University of WA and a Masters degree from Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism.

    00

  • #
    tom0mason

    Temperatures around the world rise and fall both currently and historically — unfortunately humans will not survive… well according to the UN.
    Of course we never survived the Maunder or Dalton minimums, we were all wiped out during the Medieval Optimum — well hopefully it was the only the Left-wing Marxists types due to their lack of common sense. :)
    Temperatures rise or fall and the survivors are the ones that adapt — darn lefties just want everything to be unchanging, static, and can never see beyond their stasis view, as if now was somehow near perfect. Sad really, no experience beyond their office desks, no practical experiences to draw on, and such limited imaginations. Progress to the lefty is diminution of human talent, containing and reducing individual and common knowledge, limiting outcomes, the necessary lowering of all individual worth and expectations — except for the elite lefty. Progress to me is the flourishing of practical talent and skill, the expansion of individual and common knowledge, and the
    rightful raising of individual expectations, value, rank, and worth.

    70

  • #
    Ursus Augustus

    Off topic but…. have a look at the BOM El Nino model predictions used to justify their forecast issued today. The ‘models’ suddenly increase their predicted rate of change of (El Nino induced) sea surface temperature anomoly with time by a factor of 4.

    With the ice and snow in Tassie and Victoria and the Antarctic researchers being iced by record sea ice, in this is just in the nick of time, eh.

    Talk about a ‘Deus Ex Machina”.

    20

  • #
    Dave

    Amazing

    At the University Internet CAFE

    The Conversation

    128 comments have been posted since Sunday

    Seems Alarmists aren’t that interested in Climate change anymore
    Maybe Lomberg has sidetracked them

    Jo’s two Maurice Newman posts so far have attracted over 250 comments since Saturday

    Conclusion

    The Conversation is dying out through self back patting boredom

    82

    • #
    • #
      el gordo

      There may not be many commenters (real names are required) but the left do read it avidly and link to stories regularly.

      The Conversation is unashamedly biased, but as long as the taxpayer is not funding it …

      60

      • #
        tom0mason

        el gordo,

        Also it is mentally unhealthy to delight in retelling evermore elaborate stories of sickness.
        That is why those with this demented mentality and a jaundice eye, believe such blogs full of sick comments are normal and healthy.

        30

  • #
    observa

    ‘Record Antarctic sea ice is forcing scientists to consider relocating research bases as they struggle to cope.
    Satellite observations show a new daily record being set for ­Antarctic sea ice every day for the past two weeks. Annual records have also been broken every year for the past three years.
    Rob Wooding, general manager of the Australian Antarctic Division’s Operations Branch, said expanding sea ice was now causing serious problems.
    Last year, fuel supplies were flown to Australia’s Mawson base by helicopter because the harbour had failed to clear. Dr Wooding said the situation was “unsustainable”.
    He said it was possible for the Aurora Australis icebreaker to break through a certain amount of sea ice to enter the harbour, and the planned capability of a replacement icebreaker would increase the ability to do this.
    But conditions experienced last year of thick sea ice, with snow cover, extending out 40 to 50km could not regularly be navigated by any Antarctic resupply vessel………….

    Professor Tony Worby, chief executive of the Climate and Ecosystems Co-operative Research Centre, said expanding Antarctic sea ice had not been ­expected initially with climate change, but was now better understood.’

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/climate/australian-antarctic-division-battles-record-ice-considers-moving/story-e6frg6xf-1227350881836?from=public_rss

    Professor Worby, usual suspect and master of the understatement, comes to a ‘better understanding’.

    40

    • #
      Rick Will

      How is it possible to contemplate a “better understanding” when – THE SCIENCE IS SETTLED for decades now.

      When the sea ice was receding it was going to dramatically alter the global albedo and cause runaway warming. Now that the ice is expanding why don’t we have runaway cooling? Maybe we do!

      Can you imagine the quandary for the Abbott government funding a new ice breaker to a get to the Mawson base while also committing to fund the UN in its propaganda against man made CO2 and global warming. This IS FUNNY! I hope someone in government can see the absurdity of this.

      20

  • #
  • #
    pat

    12 May: Age: Neil McMahon: Q&A recap: Struggle Street sparks heated debate and smart question from school student
    He (Palmer) had his traditional whack for Rupert Murdoch and a final shot at the PM, during discussion over the size of the tin-foil hat worn by Maurice Newman, economic adviser and climate-change contrarian.
    Do you think people with views like Newman’s “should be allowed anywhere within a mile of the prime minister?” an exasperated man asked the panel.
    In a democracy that was up to the prime minister, said Clive. Then the kicker: “But that might give you an idea of what sort of a prime minister he is.”
    But the best answer – and some light relief to end a serious show – came from panellist Nakkiah Lui, again with another question. “I’d just like to ask Maurice Newman, is Elvis actually dead or has he just gone home? Was the moon landing faked? It’s a conspiracy theory up there with [thinking] playing Beyonce records backwards plays satanic verses.”
    By which she meant, it’s all utter nonsense. Or is it? We trust Q&A will investigate Mr Newman’s stance on Beyonce and report back next week.
    http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/qa-recap-struggle-street-sparks-heated-debate-and-smart-question-from-school-student-20150512-ggzc16.html

    Bob Brown downgraded at Fairfax…see his letter way down the pile of anti-Govt pieces:

    12 May: SMH Letters: Children the losers from Tony Abbott’s cynical games
    SCROLL DOWN:
    Whatever the weather
    Maurice Newman, a key adviser to Tony Abbott, tells us that the issue of climate change is a fake event, used by the United Nations to engineer “a new world order under the control of the UN”.
    Yet the US Navy in 2010 released the document titled US Navy Climate Change Roadmap to evaluate the strategic responses climate change will necessitate. It was co-authored by the navy, with officers seconded from the operational fleet, with the close collaboration of the US Coast Guard and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
    How ill-informed can an Australian government adviser be? Certainly Newman has set a new low standard.
    David Rose Hamilton

    Maurice Newman’s claim that climate change is a hoax seems to be a case of having his head in the coal.
    Vicky Marquis Glebe

    What’s that you say Newman? A UN conspiracy to destroy democracy and take over the world? Quickly Miss Moneypenny, summon 007 or even agent 86 or Austin Powers or … this is clearly the work of KAOS.
    Peter Hayes Port Macquarie

    Milne’s exit
    James Massola’s report that Christine Milne “held discussions about her exit with Greens Party founder Bob Brown” is incorrect (“Sudden Milne resignation a long time in the making”, May 8).
    Bob Brown Cygnet (Tas)
    http://www.smh.com.au/comment/smh-letters/children-the-losers-from-tony-abbotts-cynical-games-20150512-ggysdj.html

    00

  • #
    pat

    11 May: Northern Echo: Giles Parkinson, RenewEconomy: Big coal wins again as policy bastardry continues
    The appalling shenanigans over the renewable energy target stand as one of the most cynical examples of policy sabotage in Australia…
    The cynicism is breath-taking…
    ***To understand the thinking within the PM’s office, it is instructive to read the latest outburst from his main business advisor, Maurice Newman, who wrote in The Australian today (again) that climate science was a hoax designed by the UN as part of a fiendish plot to establish a new world order.
    So, while the government’s most senior advisors have been hiding under the table in the hope of avoiding this new world order – and maybe even giant bats – investment has dried up, and many international investors and financiers and project developers decided to turn elsewhere, particularly to the Asia, Africa and Latin America markets, where renewables are in full bloom…
    For the record, the CCA just did complete its own review, just a few months ago. And its finding was that there was no justification for the 41,000GWh to be cut…
    Perhaps the Abbott government would take more notice of the CCA’s findings if it appointed Newman as chairman. Nothing would surprise.
    http://www.echo.net.au/2015/05/big-coal-wins-again-as-policy-bastardry-continues/

    00

  • #
    pat

    Richard has upset 1Million (minus?)

    11 May: ABC PM: Richard Branson backs away from Great Barrier Reef comments
    ASHLEY HALL: The billionaire businessman Richard Branson is backing away from his call for the United Nations’ World Heritage body to list the Great Barrier Reef as in danger.
    In a blog post on the Virgin website late last week, Sir Richard wrote the reef was under “severe threat”, and should have its status downgraded to protect it from being turned into an industrial dumping ground.
    He’d lent his name to a campaign by the advocacy group 1MillionWomen.
    But in the face of a storm of criticism, Sir Richard has now gone quiet. He says he was unaware of the Australian Government’s efforts to protect the reef…
    SHARNIE KIM: 1MillionWomen’s director is Natalie Isaacs.
    NATALIE ISAACS: The oceans are dear to his heart and so is the Great Barrier Reef so we thought that it’d be fantastic if he could help us get profile by wearing one our t-shirts and making a blog about it…
    The Environment Minister Greg Hunt says he’ll speak to Sir Richard tonight and highlight what he calls the “incorrect claims being made by green groups”…
    http://www.abc.net.au/pm/content/2015/s4233514.htm

    ***reprimand? not a word ABC used.

    12 May: The New Daily: Ebony Bowen: Why Hunt is angry with Branson
    The Coalition government will ***reprimand billionaire Richard Branson after he said the Great Barrier Reef was under “severe threat” and needed to be given environmental protection by the United Nations…
    According to a report by the ABC, Branson’s advocacy has angered Environment Minister Greg Hunt, who argued the government was doing enough for the reef…
    A spokesperson for Mr Hunt also told Nine News it would be “unjustifiable” for the reef to be given UNESCO protection given the Abbott government’s environmental plan.
    Mr Hunt told The Courier Mail a spokesperson for Branson had apologised to him and said the billionaire may not have had the “full picture” before commenting.
    Greenpeace spokeswoman Jess Panegyres told the ABC that Branson had been targeted for commenting on the highly-politicised issue.
    “I think it’s consistent with a lot of debate about the Great Barrier Reef where critics of the Australian Government’s approach are often attacked, rather than all of us working together to protect the reef which, after all, is what matters most,” Ms Panegyres said…
    http://thenewdaily.com.au/news/2015/05/12/govt-unhappy-bransons-great-barrier-reef-claims/

    00

  • #
    Richard

    Anyone who has investigated this subject with an open-mind already know that CAGW is being used as a pretext for worldwide full-scale implementation of Agenda 21 which will essentially turn us all into hapless slaves to the controlling elite. Some like James Delingpole have had the balls to come out and speak about this but others have been too afraid in fear of being marginalized and denigrated. The idea sounds so luducious (even when you know its true) speaking about it openly and seeing the reaction of others makes you feel you should be locked away in a mad-house. I think the best thing anyone can do to protect themselves from what is coming is to invest in physcial assests as I am sure that collapsing the currency of nations with their fractional reserve banking model will be the start of our nightmares.

    21

  • #
    pat

    thanx to TonyfromOz & others for analysis re China/renewables. very informative.

    back to NWO/Maurice Newman, especially in light of ABC Lateline ignoring the essential points raised in Newman’s article.

    THE NEW WORLD ORDER WRIT LARGE:

    12 May: ABC Big Ideas: How accountancy is changing the world
    Businesses and governments are facing nothing short of a revolution in accounting and corporate reporting. You think that’s nothing to do with you? Well, think again. Because it has fundamental impacts on our modern economy. All of a sudden values such as the environment, social networks and knowledge-based commerce have to be considered as capital.
    PHOTO CAPTION: In our modern economy balancing the books means considering values like the environment, knowledge and social networking.
    Guests:
    Jane Gleeson-White, PhD student in creative writing at the University of New South Wales and has degrees in economics and literature from the University of Sydney and was an intern at the Peggy Guggenheim Collection in Venice. She blogs at bookishgirl.com.au.
    Damien Walsh, CEO of bankmecu
    Nick Ridehalgh, Partner at KPMG, a global network of professional firms providing Audit, Tax and Advisory services
    Moderator: Hugo Armstrong, Strategic Communication Consultant, Swinburne Leadership Institute
    Publications:
    Title: Six Capitals: The revolution capitalism has to have – or can accountants save the planet?, Jane Gleason-White, Allen & Unwin
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/bigideas/how-accountancy-is-changing-the-world/6425068

    my oh my. above is a second helping!

    Feb 2015: ABC Big Ideas: Can accountants save the planet?
    Accountants are unlikely revolutionaries, but according to Jane Gleeson-White, they are leading the charge in reforming the global economy for the good of us all. An international movement has begun within the finance world, and a few innovative global companies are starting to look at how nature and society can be included in their bottom line.
    Guest:
    Jane Gleeson- White, PhD student in creative writing at the University of New South Wales and has degrees in economics and literature from the University of Sydney and was an intern at the Peggy Guggenheim Collection in Venice. She blogs at bookishgirl.com.au.
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/bigideas/can-accountants-save-the-planet/6055334

    to be continued.

    00

  • #
    pat

    moderator of 12 May ABC Big Ideas:

    LinkedIn: Hugo Armstrong
    Currently undertaking a consulting assignment for the Swinburne Leadership Institute. Other recent clients include Pacific Hydro and Energy Safe Victoria.
    Corporate Affairs Manager, CitiPower and Powercor Australia 1998 – 2013
    ***Journalist / Presenter / Producer, Australian Broadcasting Corporation 1984 – 1994
    https://au.linkedin.com/in/hugodarmstrong

    no Govt repesentative, but a Labor one:

    Oct 2014: ABC Big Ideas: Inequality: Have we got a problem?
    The second discussion in the Swinburne Leadership Dialogue series presented by the Swinburne Leadership Institute. 18th September 2014
    Guests:
    Andrew Leigh, Andrew Leigh, Labor Federal Member for Fraser
    Chair: Dr Andrew Dodd, Former ABC host and now Convenor of Journalism in Swinburne’s Department of Media and Communication
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/bigideas/inequality/5768862

    Chair Andrew Dodd, from Swinburne Leadership Institute website:

    Swinburne Leadership Institute: Associate Professor Andrew Dodd
    Andrew Dodd has been seconded to the Swinburne Leadership Institute as a Research Fellow in 2015…
    He has been a journalist for over twenty-five years, working in radio, TV, print and on-line. He was a media and business writer with The Australian and a broadcaster with ABC Radio National, where he presented many of the network’s programs and founded the Media Report. He was a reporter on The 7.30 Report and has also worked for Radio Netherlands and community radio. He has freelanced for The Age and numerous magazines and newspapers and currently writes on media issues for various outlets.
    Andrew’s Leadership Project at the SLI is called Change Agents, and will comprise five Swinburne Leadership forums, along with ten 55 minute radio programs – each of which is reworked as a chapter for a book…
    Change Agents are leaders…

    About Us: Swinburne Uni of Technology Leadership Institute
    ***As leadership rumblings continue in Canberra, to the disappointment and scepticism of many Australians, the Swinburne Leadership Institute’s 2015 Dialogue program looks elsewhere to find real leadership this semester…
    Our 2015 program takes us from the business sector and the very foundations of global capitalism, to the community where ‘ordinary’ Australians are demonstrating extraordinary leadership..

    to be continued.

    00

  • #
    pat

    Swinburne Leadership Institute: Advisory Board
    Graham Goldsmith
    Advisory Board member (Foundation Chair)
    Graham retired in 2012 after 25 years with Goldman Sachs Australia (having joined JBWere & Son in 1987, and then continued with the firm through its joint venture and eventually to Goldman Sachs). His last role with the firm prior to retirement was as Vice Chairman and a Managing Director having worked in both Melbourne and London during his career across a number of divisions of the firm. He was also previously Chair of the Goldman Sachs Australia Foundation.

    Swinburne Leadership Institute: Stephen Graham, Advisory Board member
    The company he started, Bitu-mill, and its associated entities, now have a turnover of $300 million across Australia in all sorts of road infrastructure activities. He repeated the pattern, establishing a string of companies including Boat O Craigo and R W DOLAN Wines as well as a winery in the Yarra Valley. Stephen is the Principal Director of the Graham Group.
    Stephen’s faith in people and natural progression has seen him venture into the field of philanthropy. As a donor, his focus is on young people and educational opportunities as well as his passion for Authentic Leadership…
    ***Stephen is the founding benefactor of the Swinburne Leadership Institute.

    Coming Up 4 June: Swinburne Leadership Dialogue: How to inspire a royal commission
    Between them Joanne McCarthy and Peter Fox exposed the extent of sex abuse within the Catholic Church and spurred the Gillard Government to establish the Royal Commission.
    MC – Dr Andrew Dodd

    to be continued.

    00

  • #
    pat

    ABC Big Ideas 12 May is big on the Global Reporting Initiative GRI (not to mention terms the panellists throw around such as epoch-shifting, externalities, carbon tax, environmental ethics, pension funds etc) with KPMG’s Nick expounding on Prince Charles calling them in post-GFC due to concern financial regulation might be coming!

    Wikipedia: Global Reporting Initiative
    The Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) is a non-profit organization that promotes topics of sustainability. It produces standards for sustainability reporting — also known as ecological footprint reporting, environmental social governance (ESG) reporting, triple bottom line (TBL) reporting, and corporate social responsibility (CSR) reporting. Mission of GRI is to make sustainability reporting as prevalent as the conventional financial reporting…
    The standardized reporting guidelines concerning the environment are contained within the GRI Indicator Protocol Set. The Performance Indicators (PI) includes criteria on energy, biodiversity and emissions. There are 30 environmental indicators ranging from EN1 (materials used by weight) to EN30 (total environmental expenditures by type of investment)…
    ***The GRI was formed by the United States based non-profits Ceres (formerly the Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies) and ***Tellus Institute, with the support of the ***United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) in 1997…
    ***It released an “exposure draft” version of the Sustainability Reporting Guidelines in 1999, the first full version in 2000, the second version was released at the ***World Summit for Sustainable Development in Johannesburg — where the organization and the Guidelines were also referred to in the Plan of Implementation signed by all attending member states. Later that year it became a permanent institution, with its Secretariat in Amsterdam, Netherlands. Although the GRI is independent, it remains a collaborating centre of ***UNEP and works in cooperation with the ***United Nations Global Compact…
    ***A common criticism of GRI and the GRI guidelines are that the focus is on more reporting, not better reporting or more usable or actionable reporting…
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Reporting_Initiative

    Wikipedia: Tellus Institute
    The Tellus Institute is a non-profit research and policy organization based in Boston, Massachusetts. Its mission is to advance the transition to a sustainable, equitable, and humane global civilization. The Tellus Institute was founded in 1976 by Paul Raskin, Richard Rosen, Stephen Bernow, John Stutz, and David Nichols for the purpose of research on resource and environmental strategies. Dr. Paul Raskin is the President of the Institute. In the early years, it was not called Tellus but was rather, the Energy Systems Research Group (ESRG)…
    Since 1976 Tellus has conducted over 3,500 resource management and environmental strategy projects throughout the world…
    Through the years Tellus has created numerous scientific tools and reports in many different areas, including energy, water, sustainable communities, corporate social responsibility, and climate change; however, since 2005 the Institute has shifted its focus to developing a Great Transition vision for a sustainable future…
    Corporation 20/20 is an initiative of Tellus focused on corporate social responsibility. Its mission is to develop and advocate the redesign of corporations so that business is guided by social purpose as well as financial gain…
    The Global Reporting Initiative, founded by Ceres (organization) and Tellus Vice President Allen White, had the goal of developing and disseminating a standardized framework for sustainability reporting. Now an autonomous organization based in Amsterdam, the GRI’s framework has become the de facto international standard used by over 1,200 companies for corporate reporting on environmental, social and economic performance…
    Although no longer a separate entity from Tellus itself, the Center for Social Philanthropy, founded by Tellus Fellow Joshua Humphreys, is still actively researching Impact investing and Socially responsible investing as part of Tellus’ efforts to develop a vision for a sustainable, ***Great Transition world…
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tellus_Institute

    to be continued.

    00

  • #
    pat

    KPMG’s Nick also brings up Mervyn King:

    Wikipedia: Mervyn King
    A former judge of the Supreme Court of South Africa, he is currently chairman of the IIRC, chairman emeritus of the Global Reporting Initiative and director of the Association of Business Administrators of Southern Africa…
    He is currently a member of the Private Sector Advisory Group to the World Bank on Corporate Governance and a member of the international advisory boards of Stern Stewart (US), Tomorrow’s Company (United Kingdom), and the Central European Corporate Governance Association. He chairs the Asian Centre of Corporate Governance, the ***United Nations Committee on Governance and Oversight, and the Global Reporting Initiative. He is the Chairman of the International Integrated Reporting Council….
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mervyn_King_(judge)

    not in ABC Big Ideas’ summary re Nick who has been in the ***”carbon” business since the 90s:

    LinkedIn: Nick Ridehalgh is a member of the International Integrated Reporting Council’s (IIRC) working group that developed the integrated reporting framework released in December 2013…
    Working group member of the International Integrated Reporting Council (IIRC) – which developed the global framework for integrated reporting. Partner, ***PricewaterhouseCoopers June 1997 – July 2010…Register carbon auditor.

    “too cute” comment at Jane Gleeson-White’s website:

    Jane Gleeson-White: Author of Six Capitals: The revolution capitalism has to have – or can accountants save the planet?
    comment by madpigman: Hi Jane
    Great interview on Kim Hill. Thank you.
    I think we have the answers you seek. We’re promoting a system totally without money, trade or barter. Everything free and all work ***voluntary.
    It takes a bit of thinking to get ones head around. But it actually fixes everything.
    We’d love to know what you think anyway. You’re very close Jane.
    Very best regards
    Richard Osmaston
    reply by Jane Gleeson-White:
    Thanks for this Richard. Seems I’ve been awol. I’d be intrigued to hear more about your system, ***especially if it fixes everything! all best wishes, Jane
    http://janegleesonwhite.com/

    00

  • #
    pat

    should mention panellist Damien Walsh’s Bank MECU:

    Bank Mecu: Responsible Banking
    Australia’s First Customer Owned Bank
    24 service centres throughout Victoria, Queensland, ACT, NSW and South Australia
    350 staff
    127,000 personal customers
    800 community organisation and school customers
    90% customer satisfaction
    More than $3 billion in assets
    (Board includes)
    Judith Downes, Chair: Judith’s most recent position was Chief Financial Officer, Alumina Limited where she was responsible for finance, accounting, treasury, investor relations and taxation.
    Prior to joining Alumina Limited in 2009, Judith was the Chief Financial Officer and Chief Operating Officer, Institutional Division, Australia and New Zealand Banking Group Limited (ANZ) and Group General Manager Finance of ANZ. She joined ANZ in 1996…

    John Baistow – Director: John’s executive career was with CSIRO where he was a Senior Executive

    Peter Taylor – Director: Peter joined the State Electricity Commission of Victoria (SECV) in 1963 and gained experience in a broad range of multi-functional activities focusing mainly on Finance and Audit.

    Greg Camm – Director
    Greg is currently Chief Executive Officer of Superpartners Ltd, Australia’s largest superannuation administrator, which is owned by five major not-for-profit Industry Super Funds. It administers around $100b in funds, and has 2000 employees Australia wide.
    Greg was with ANZ for 16 years and returned to New Zealand as Managing Director of AMP Financial Services (New Zealand) in 2005…

    Michelle Somerville – Director: Michelle’s most recent position was as an assurance partner with KPMG for 14 years where she was responsible for the external audits of many companies across a range of sectors including financial services, not for profit, manufacturing and energy in both Australia and the United States.

    Damien Walsh – Managing Director: Damien has worked primarily in the financial services sector having spent time in Enterprise, Esso Employees, Outlook and Members Australia Credit Unions.
    http://www.bankmecu.com.au/why-bank-with-us/corporate.html

    lol, the following:

    Lost on Campus: University of Queensland: Bank MECU
    Australia’s first customer owned bank is now on campus! It also has a rediATM out the front which can be used by NAB and BOQ customers.
    http://lostoncampus.com.au/2993

    00

  • #
    pat

    just in case listeners didn’t get enough CAGW propaganda on Big Ideas overnight, Natasha Mitchell then came on with the following, which is, to put it bluntly, full of BS:

    12 May: ABC Life Matters: How to run your car on thin air
    Recently on Life Matters we looked at the launch of the new TESLA battery for homes, heralded as a game changer for renewable energy because it will allow households to store solar energy on site so that when the sun don’t shine, you can still turn your lights on.
    That’s one way of reducing carbon emissions at home.
    But what about while you’re on the hop—in your car, on a plane?
    Transport is a big source of carbon emissions as well. Electric cars are coming on line, but they’re still plagued by all sorts of limitations from charging time to how far you can drive.
    So what about the prospects of other low carbon alternative fuels? That’s the focus of a conference at The United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney called Low Carbon Transport on the Move.
    Guests:
    Dr Susan Pond, Adjunct Professor in Sustainability at the US Studies Centre at the University of Sydney
    Paul Bryan, Former Vice President of Biofuels Technology with Chevron, former manager at the US Department of Energy’s Biomass Program, now a lecturer at the University of California Berkeley in the US.
    http://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/lifematters/how-to-run-your-car-on-thin-air/6462092

    Uni of Sydney: Low Carbon Transport on the Move
    Location: Australian Technology Park
    In partnership with the New South Wales Government, the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney is holding a conference in Sydney on Low Carbon Transport on the Move.
    Convened by Dr Susan Pond, the conference will feature leaders from industry, academia and government, from the USA and Australia.
    They will focus on strategies to secure a low carbon future for transport interlinked with the affordable, reliable, safe and efficient transport systems that will be required for a rapidly expanding global population and middle class.
    Topics include disruptive technologies and business models, alternative fuels, the role of sensor technologies and real time data, and optimal use, planning and design of infrastructure, systems and networks. Sector-specific discussions will include commercial aviation and defence.
    Speakers confirmed to date:
    Richard Altman, Executive Director Emeritus, Commercial Aviation Alternative Fuels Initiative
    Hugh Bradlow, Chief Scientist, Telstra Corporation
    Paul Bryan, Lecturer, University of California Berkeley
    Bruce Godfrey, Energy Forum Chair, Australian Academy of Technology, Science and Engineering
    Robert Hill, Adjunct Professor in Sustainability, United States Studies Centre
    Jim Lane, Editor & Publisher, The Digest
    Hugo Llorens, US Consul General, Sydney
    Scott Nargar, Product Planning Manager, Hyundai Motor Company, Australia
    Susan Pond, Adjunct Professor in Sustainability, United States Studies Centre
    John Ryan, Associate Secretary, Department of Industry and Science, Australian Government
    Joelle Simonpietri, Operational Manager, Energy and Contingency Basing And Deputy, US Pacific Command Energy Team
    For draft program details, please click here
    ***This conference is a invitation-only event.
    http://ussc.edu.au/events/Low-Carbon-Transport-on-the-Move

    from draft program link:
    The Beginning of the End of Traditional Transport Fuels
    Jim Lane, Editor & Publisher, The Digest…
    Decarbonizing the Electricity Grid in Australia
    Bruce Godfrey, Energy Forum Chair, Australian Academy of Technological Sciences and Engineering (ATSE)
    Energy and the US Military Viewpoint
    Joelle Simonpietri, Operational Manager, Energy and Contingency Basing And Deputy, US Pacific Command Energy Team…etc

    00

  • #

    i say nwo: see “And in the hour of the culmination of that consciousness of the fallen ones the light from the Great Central Sun will break their government, their darkness, their false hierarchy.” -Gautama; see

    00